On Thu, 16 Apr 2026 05:23:41 GMT, David Holmes <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Hi everyone, >> >> `AccessFlags::print_on` is used for class, field and method printing, but >> those entities do not share the same modifier set. The current helper >> hard-codes a single mixed list of access flags for all 3 and is thus unaware >> of the type of the printed value. Instead of using a single shared printing >> function, we should move the printing to the relevant class, field, and >> method call sites. This makes the printer aware of the type it is printing >> and lets us check only the flags that are relevant for that type. >> >> For this change, I remove `AccessFlags::print_on` and split the printing >> into 3 separate helpers: >> - `InstanceKlass::print_class_flags` >> - `Method::print_access_flags` >> - `fieldDescriptor::print_access_flags` >> >> As a part of that, I added the missing `AccessFlags` predicates used by each >> of the new printers, and updated each printer to check all the flags >> relevant for its type, as defined by `jvm_constants.h`. This lets us cover >> class-specific, method-specific, and field-specific modifiers that were not >> handled before. >> >> I also added new gtests covering each of the 3 printing helpers and the >> previously missing flags. >> >> Testing: >> - Oracle tiers 1-3 >> - New gtests covering each of the printing helpers and each of the new flags >> >> --------- >> - [x] I confirm that I make this contribution in accordance with the >> [OpenJDK Interim AI Policy](https://openjdk.org/legal/ai). > > src/hotspot/share/oops/instanceKlass.cpp line 3706: > >> 3704: >> 3705: #if !defined(PRODUCT) || INCLUDE_JVMTI >> 3706: void InstanceKlass::print_class_flags(outputStream* st) const { > > This is incomplete. If the class is an inner class then additional access > flags are possible (private, protected, static). > EDIT: Hmm jvm_constants.h does not recognise this either via > `JVM_RECOGNIZED_CLASS_MODIFIERS`. Not sure how this should be handled. Also do we need to handle ACC_MODULE, or do we not actually create an `instanceKlass` for those? ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/30746#discussion_r3090935687
