On Wed, 10 Sep 2025 07:34:09 GMT, Kim Barrett <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Please review this change that renames the all-static class `Atomic` to >> `AtomicAccess`. The reason for this name change is to allow the introduction >> of the new type `Atomic<T>` >> ([JDK-8367013](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8367013)). >> >> The PR has several commits, according to the specific category of change >> being >> made. It may be easier to review the PR by studying these individual commits. >> >> Although the file "atomic.hpp" is being renamed to "atomicAccess.hpp", I >> chose >> to not rename the various "atomic_<cpu>.*" and "atomic_<os>_<cpu>.*" files. >> >> There are a number of comments containing the word "Atomic" that I didn't >> change. They are generically about atomic operations, and will just as well >> serve as referring to the future `Atomic<T>`. >> >> Testing: mach5 tier1, GHA sanity tests. >> This is one of those changes where successful builds indicate the change is >> good. > > Kim Barrett has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a > merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains 12 commits: > > - rename recently added Atomic:: => AtomicAccess:: > - Merge branch 'master' into atomic-access > - fix prefiously missed arg misalignments > - rename test_atomic.cpp > - update copyrights > - misc cleanups > - fix indentation from rename > - rename Atomic => AtomicAccess in gtests > - rename Atomic => AtomicAccess > - change includes of atomic.hpp in gtests > - ... and 2 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/af9b9050...11007c45 Needs re-review because of updates to deal with merge conflicts and to update newly merged code that needed the renamings applied. @stefank @theRealAph @dholmes-ora Hm, now says there is a new merge conflict. Guess you folks should hold off on re-review. src/hotspot/cpu/aarch64/gc/shared/barrierSetNMethod_aarch64.cpp line 118: > 116: } > 117: > 118: void set_value(int value, int bit_mask) { This and similar changes for arm and riscv came from a merged changeset. I took that new version and updated it for `Atomic::` => `AtomicAccess::` renaming. src/hotspot/share/jfr/periodic/sampling/jfrCPUTimeThreadSampler.cpp line 394: > 392: last_recompute_check = os::javaTimeNanos(); > 393: } > 394: DEBUG_ONLY(if > (AtomicAccess::load_acquire(&_out_of_stack_walking_enabled)) {) Another case of taking a merge update and then adjusting for `Atomic::` => `AtomicAccess::`. src/hotspot/share/runtime/basicLock.inline.hpp line 32: > 30: #include "runtime/objectMonitor.inline.hpp" > 31: > 32: inline markWord BasicLock::displaced_header() const { These functions were removed by a merge update. ------------- PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/27135#issuecomment-3277397927 PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/27135#issuecomment-3277401578 PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/27135#discussion_r2338471419 PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/27135#discussion_r2338472405 PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/27135#discussion_r2338473094
