I like the idea of using reflection. How much work would it be to make the change for the existing platforms as well? I don't really like that there are two different code paths. Also, you only made the change for Linux.
Some other comments: LinuxCDebugger.java - This change would return null on non-supported cpus instead of throwing an exception with an error message. The error message is more user-friendly. LinuxDebuggerLocal.c and libproc.h - I don't understand why these changes were made. Probably came from some other change? LinuxThreadContextFactory.java, RemoteDebuggerClient.java, HotSpotAgent.java, HTMLGenerator.java - include the name of the CPU or machine type that wasn't found in the exception message VM.java and vmStructs.cpp - Looks like an unrelated change. saproc.make:94 - weird indentation Thanks, /Staffan On 21 aug 2012, at 23:47, BILL PITTORE <[email protected]> wrote: > These changes allow for the (easier) addition of new processor types to SA > other than the standard x86, amd64 and sparc. By using reflection, it is not > necessary to instantiate the new class directly in the existing code. Rather > the class name is derived from the cpu/os name and is loaded and the > constructor called. Note that the existing cpus (x86, amd64, and sparc) code > was not modified. Only newly added cpus would go through the reflection code > path. > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~bpittore/7154641/webrev.00/ > > thanks, > bill >
