On Fri, 18 Sep 2026 12:49:59 GMT, Chen Liang <[email protected]> wrote:

>> The identity hash code of value objects currently can produce 0. A zero 
>> value is usually not anticipated for System.identityHashCode calls unless 
>> the argument is null; the 0 hash also cannot be cached. Thus, we should move 
>> away from the 0 hash.
>> 
>> ---------
>> - [x] I confirm that I make this contribution in accordance with the 
>> [OpenJDK Interim AI Policy](https://openjdk.org/legal/ai).
>
> Chen Liang has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional 
> commit since the last revision:
> 
>   Don't overmask

src/java.base/share/classes/jdk/internal/misc/UnsafeConstants.java line 116:

> 114: 
> 115:     /**
> 116:      * The mask used to cut hashes to the hash field in the mark word.

Is "cut hashes" the right term here? The `Unsafe.hashCodeMask()` on the other 
hand says:
> Reports the mask used to fit hashcodes into the cache field of the mark word.

While at it, this file will need a copyright year update.

-------------

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/32660#discussion_r4060030581

Reply via email to