Skip to content

8353175: Eliminate double iteration of stream in FieldDescriptor reinitialization #2010

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

rvansa
Copy link

@rvansa rvansa commented Jul 22, 2025

This backport is a partial fix for a performance regression and prerequisite for backport of openjdk/jdk#24847 (will be done through https://github.com/rvansa/jdk21u-dev/tree/refs/heads/rvansa/backport-8352075)

The backport was not clean; a notable new change is in reflectionUtils.hpp (later JDK versions remove the affected class) - I am adding friend class FieldStream to InstanceKlass to accomodate for this.

Backport-of: f169fc5a99ee2b485e156c043134ab76b7e5ebd9


Progress

  • Change must be properly reviewed (1 review required, with at least 1 Reviewer)
  • Change must not contain extraneous whitespace
  • Commit message must refer to an issue
  • JDK-8353175 needs maintainer approval

Issue

  • JDK-8353175: Eliminate double iteration of stream in FieldDescriptor reinitialization (Bug - P3 - Requested)

Reviewers

Reviewing

Using git

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk21u-dev.git pull/2010/head:pull/2010
$ git checkout pull/2010

Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/2010
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.org/jdk21u-dev.git pull/2010/head

Using Skara CLI tools

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 2010

View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 2010

Using diff file

Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.org/jdk21u-dev/pull/2010.diff

Using Webrev

Link to Webrev Comment

@rvansa rvansa changed the title 8353175: Eliminate double iteration of stream in FieldDescriptor reinitialization Backport 8353175: Eliminate double iteration of stream in FieldDescriptor reinitialization Jul 22, 2025
@rvansa rvansa changed the title Backport 8353175: Eliminate double iteration of stream in FieldDescriptor reinitialization 8353175: Eliminate double iteration of stream in FieldDescriptor reinitialization Jul 22, 2025
@bridgekeeper
Copy link

bridgekeeper bot commented Jul 22, 2025

👋 Welcome back rvansa! A progress list of the required criteria for merging this PR into master will be added to the body of your pull request. There are additional pull request commands available for use with this pull request.

@rvansa rvansa force-pushed the backport-8353175 branch from a28e638 to 620d6aa Compare July 22, 2025 15:30
@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Jul 22, 2025

❗ This change is not yet ready to be integrated.
See the Progress checklist in the description for automated requirements.

@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Jul 22, 2025

@rvansa Please do not rebase or force-push to an active PR as it invalidates existing review comments. Note for future reference, the bots always squash all changes into a single commit automatically as part of the integration. See OpenJDK Developers’ Guide for more information.

@openjdk openjdk bot added the rfr Pull request is ready for review label Jul 22, 2025
@mlbridge
Copy link

mlbridge bot commented Jul 22, 2025

Webrevs

@rvansa
Copy link
Author

rvansa commented Jul 23, 2025

/approval request Fixes performance regression introduced in 21

@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Jul 23, 2025

@rvansa
8353175: The approval request has been created successfully.

@openjdk openjdk bot added the approval Requires approval; will be removed when approval is received label Jul 23, 2025
@GoeLin
Copy link
Member

GoeLin commented Jul 30, 2025

Hi @rvansa , please first get a review before labeling fix-request.

@openjdk openjdk bot removed the approval Requires approval; will be removed when approval is received label Jul 30, 2025
Copy link
Member

@shipilev shipilev left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The change looks fine. But you need to name the PR Backport f169fc5a99ee2b485e156c043134ab76b7e5ebd9, not just the changeset, to get it properly hooked up.

@rvansa rvansa changed the title 8353175: Eliminate double iteration of stream in FieldDescriptor reinitialization Backport f169fc5a99ee2b485e156c043134ab76b7e5ebd9 Jul 30, 2025
@openjdk openjdk bot changed the title Backport f169fc5a99ee2b485e156c043134ab76b7e5ebd9 8353175: Eliminate double iteration of stream in FieldDescriptor reinitialization Jul 30, 2025
@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Jul 30, 2025

This backport pull request has now been updated with issue from the original commit.

@openjdk openjdk bot added the backport Port of a pull request already in a different code base label Jul 30, 2025
@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Jul 30, 2025

⚠️ @rvansa This change is now ready for you to apply for maintainer approval. This can be done directly in each associated issue or by using the /approval command.

@rvansa
Copy link
Author

rvansa commented Aug 5, 2025

/approval request Partially fixes performance regression introduced in 21

@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Aug 5, 2025

@rvansa
8353175: The approval request has been updated successfully.

@openjdk openjdk bot added the approval Requires approval; will be removed when approval is received label Aug 5, 2025
@jerboaa
Copy link
Contributor

jerboaa commented Aug 7, 2025

https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8352075 is a fairly recent change (June 2025) in JDK 25 and touches core parts of the VM. We should stage this backport. Deferring to January as we'd have at least some real-world usage in JDK 25 at this point.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
approval Requires approval; will be removed when approval is received backport Port of a pull request already in a different code base rfr Pull request is ready for review
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants