Skip to content

Conversation

@lahodaj
Copy link
Contributor

@lahodaj lahodaj commented May 14, 2025

This patch builds on top of #24746, and adds support for @RequiresIdentity to --release.

Important parts of the patch:

  • CreateSymbols now keeps RuntimeInvisibleTypeAnnotationsAttribute/RuntimeVisibleTypeAnnotationsAttribute annotations
  • for ct.sym, the @RequiresIdentity annotation is converted to a synthetic @RequiresIdentity+Annotation, as for other similar annotations.
  • for parameters, there's a new flag that marks the parameter as "requires identity". The reason is that the other synthetic annotations on symbols used by ct.sym/--release are normally not added to the model, and hence invisible in the model. Flags are usually used instead of the synthetic annotations in javac. Using this new flag allows us to keep the behavior the same for the @RequiresIdentity+Annotation
  • for type variables, the synthetic annotation is filtered out in the API method

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

Issue

  • JDK-8356894: Adjust CreateSymbols to properly handle the newly added @jdk.internal.RequiresIdentity (Bug - P3)

Reviewers

Reviewing

Using git

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/25232/head:pull/25232
$ git checkout pull/25232

Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/25232
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/25232/head

Using Skara CLI tools

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 25232

View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 25232

Using diff file

Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/25232.diff

Using Webrev

Link to Webrev Comment

@bridgekeeper
Copy link

bridgekeeper bot commented May 14, 2025

👋 Welcome back jlahoda! A progress list of the required criteria for merging this PR into pr/24746 will be added to the body of your pull request. There are additional pull request commands available for use with this pull request.

@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented May 14, 2025

@lahodaj This change now passes all automated pre-integration checks.

ℹ️ This project also has non-automated pre-integration requirements. Please see the file CONTRIBUTING.md for details.

After integration, the commit message for the final commit will be:

8356894: Adjust CreateSymbols to properly handle the newly added @jdk.internal.RequiresIdentity

Reviewed-by: vromero, liach

You can use pull request commands such as /summary, /contributor and /issue to adjust it as needed.

At the time when this comment was updated there had been 29 new commits pushed to the master branch:

As there are no conflicts, your changes will automatically be rebased on top of these commits when integrating. If you prefer to avoid this automatic rebasing, please check the documentation for the /integrate command for further details.

➡️ To integrate this PR with the above commit message to the master branch, type /integrate in a new comment.

@openjdk openjdk bot added the rfr Pull request is ready for review label May 14, 2025
@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented May 14, 2025

@lahodaj The following labels will be automatically applied to this pull request:

  • build
  • compiler

When this pull request is ready to be reviewed, an "RFR" email will be sent to the corresponding mailing lists. If you would like to change these labels, use the /label pull request command.

@mlbridge
Copy link

mlbridge bot commented May 14, 2025

Webrevs

Copy link
Contributor

@vicente-romero-oracle vicente-romero-oracle left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

lgtm

Copy link
Member

@liach liach left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks good to me too; though I don't know why we need special treatment for requiresIdentityInternal for Symbol.

} else if (proxy.type.tsym == syms.restrictedType.tsym) {
Assert.check(sym.kind == MTH);
sym.flags_field |= RESTRICTED;
} else if (proxy.type.tsym == syms.requiresIdentityType.tsym) {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
} else if (proxy.type.tsym == syms.requiresIdentityType.tsym) {
} else if (proxy.type.tsym == syms.requiresIdentityType.tsym) {

@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented May 19, 2025

@lahodaj this pull request can not be integrated into pr/24746 due to one or more merge conflicts. To resolve these merge conflicts and update this pull request you can run the following commands in the local repository for your personal fork:

git checkout JDK-8356894
git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pr/24746
git merge FETCH_HEAD
# resolve conflicts and follow the instructions given by git merge
git commit -m "Merge pr/24746"
git push

@openjdk openjdk bot added the merge-conflict Pull request has merge conflict with target branch label May 19, 2025
@openjdk-notifier openjdk-notifier bot changed the base branch from pr/24746 to master May 19, 2025 22:50
@openjdk-notifier
Copy link

The parent pull request that this pull request depends on has now been integrated and the target branch of this pull request has been updated. This means that changes from the dependent pull request can start to show up as belonging to this pull request, which may be confusing for reviewers. To remedy this situation, simply merge the latest changes from the new target branch into this pull request by running commands similar to these in the local repository for your personal fork:

git checkout JDK-8356894
git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git master
git merge FETCH_HEAD
# if there are conflicts, follow the instructions given by git merge
git commit -m "Merge master"
git push

@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented May 19, 2025

⚠️ @lahodaj This pull request contains merges that bring in commits not present in the target repository. Since this is not a "merge style" pull request, these changes will be squashed when this pull request in integrated. If this is your intention, then please ignore this message. If you want to preserve the commit structure, you must change the title of this pull request to Merge <project>:<branch> where <project> is the name of another project in the OpenJDK organization (for example Merge jdk:master).

Copy link
Contributor

@vicente-romero-oracle vicente-romero-oracle left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

lgtm

@openjdk openjdk bot removed the merge-conflict Pull request has merge conflict with target branch label May 21, 2025
Copy link
Contributor

@vicente-romero-oracle vicente-romero-oracle left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

lgtm

@openjdk openjdk bot added the ready Pull request is ready to be integrated label May 21, 2025
@lahodaj
Copy link
Contributor Author

lahodaj commented May 23, 2025

/integrate

@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented May 23, 2025

Going to push as commit 9d9e41f.
Since your change was applied there have been 65 commits pushed to the master branch:

Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts.

@openjdk openjdk bot added the integrated Pull request has been integrated label May 23, 2025
@openjdk openjdk bot closed this May 23, 2025
@openjdk openjdk bot removed ready Pull request is ready to be integrated rfr Pull request is ready for review labels May 23, 2025
@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented May 23, 2025

@lahodaj Pushed as commit 9d9e41f.

💡 You may see a message that your pull request was closed with unmerged commits. This can be safely ignored.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants