On Thu, 21 Apr 2022 14:03:39 GMT, Daniel Fuchs <dfu...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> I ran `codespell` on modules owned by the serviceability team >> (`java.instrument java.management.rmi java.management jdk.attach >> jdk.hotspot.agent jdk.internal.jvmstat jdk.jcmd jdk.jconsole jdk.jdi >> jdk.jdwp.agent jdk.jstatd jdk.management.agent jdk.management`), and >> accepted those changes where it indeed discovered real typos. >> >> >> I will update copyright years using a script before pushing (otherwise like >> every second change would be a copyright update, making reviewing much >> harder). >> >> The long term goal here is to make tooling support for running `codespell`. >> The trouble with automating this is of course all false positives. But >> before even trying to solve that issue, all true positives must be fixed. >> Hence this PR. > > LGTM. I spotted one fix in a exception message. I don't expect that there > will be tests depending on that, but it might still be a good idea to run the > serviceability tests to double check. Although I guess the test would have > had the same typo and would have been fixed too were it the case :-) > @dfuch I have only updated files in `src`, so if the incorrect spelling is > tested, that test will now fail. I'm unfortunately not well versed in what > tests cover serviceability code. Can you suggest a suitable set of tests to > run? Folks from serviceability-dev will be more able to answer that - but I would suggest running tier2-tier3 as a precaution. ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/8334
