8365501: Remove special AdapterHandlerEntry for abstract methods #26764

ashu-mehra · 2025-08-13T18:45:54Z

This PR removes the need for having AdapterHandlerEntry for abstract methods. The check for abstract method is now done in the accessor functions in Method such as Method::get_i2c_entry().
Motivation for this change is described in the JBS issue.

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-8365501: Remove special AdapterHandlerEntry for abstract methods (Enhancement - P4)

Reviewers

Vladimir Kozlov (@vnkozlov - Reviewer)
Andrew Dinn (@adinn - Reviewer)

Reviewing

Using git

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/26764/head:pull/26764
$ git checkout pull/26764

Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/26764
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/26764/head

Using Skara CLI tools

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 26764

View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 26764

Using diff file

Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/26764.diff

Using Webrev

Link to Webrev Comment

Signed-off-by: Ashutosh Mehra <[email protected]>

bridgekeeper · 2025-08-13T18:46:42Z

👋 Welcome back asmehra! 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.

openjdk · 2025-08-13T18:49:02Z

@ashu-mehra 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:

8365501: Remove special AdapterHandlerEntry for abstract methods

Reviewed-by: kvn, adinn

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 60 new commits pushed to the master branch:

98af189: 8366456: Allow AllocFailStrategy for RBTree
7f0cd64: 8361582: AArch64: Some ConH values cannot be replicated with SVE
fc77e76: 8365791: IGV: Update build dependencies
... and 57 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/124575b4c2b52328a8efddb40e67057a53b44a04...master

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 · 2025-08-13T18:50:21Z

@ashu-mehra The following label will be automatically applied to this pull request:

hotspot

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

mlbridge · 2025-08-13T18:53:36Z

Webrevs

vnkozlov

Nice. Let me test it.

vnkozlov

My tier1-5 testing passed

ashu-mehra · 2025-08-14T02:59:40Z

@vnkozlov thanks for reviewing and testing it.

ashu-mehra · 2025-08-14T02:59:58Z

@adinn can you please review it as well.

ashu-mehra · 2025-08-27T16:29:09Z

@adinn @vnkozlov I merged the master into this PR to get the latest changes. Can you please review it again.

src/hotspot/share/oops/method.cpp

Signed-off-by: Ashutosh Mehra <[email protected]>

vnkozlov

Good.

ashu-mehra · 2025-08-28T14:58:07Z

New test failure java/lang/Thread/virtual/stress/GetStackTraceALotWhenBlocking.java#id0 on macos-aarch64:

#
# A fatal error has been detected by the Java Runtime Environment:
#
#  SIGSEGV (0xb) at pc=0x0000000103bf9bbc, pid=12937, tid=29447
#
# JRE version: OpenJDK Runtime Environment (26.0) (build 26-internal-ashu-mehra-eb641188b3a0c241d95292a834404958c3e4e5dd)
# Java VM: OpenJDK 64-Bit Server VM (26-internal-ashu-mehra-eb641188b3a0c241d95292a834404958c3e4e5dd, mixed mode, sharing, tiered, compressed oops, compressed class ptrs, g1 gc, bsd-aarch64)
# Problematic frame:
# V  [libjvm.dylib+0x2f5bbc]  void StackChunkFrameStream<(ChunkFrames)1>::next<RegisterMap>(RegisterMap*, bool)+0xbc
#

ashu-mehra · 2025-08-28T19:39:55Z

I haven't been able to reproduce it locally after running the test 1000 times.

vnkozlov · 2025-08-28T22:00:35Z

I haven't been able to reproduce it locally after running the test 1000 times.

And I did not see such failure in our testing.

ashu-mehra · 2025-08-29T13:53:18Z

I filed a bug for the crash https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8366438

vnkozlov · 2025-08-29T22:29:46Z

@adinn, please review these changes.

adinn

Looks good but I would appreciate an explanation as to why we don't need the lock.

adinn · 2025-09-01T10:28:02Z

src/hotspot/share/runtime/sharedRuntime.cpp

 void AdapterHandlerLibrary::initialize() {
  {
    ResourceMark rm;
-    MutexLocker mu(AdapterHandlerLibrary_lock);


Why are we ok to drop this lock here? Was it unnecessary even before this change?

This lock was required because AdapterHandlerLibrary::create_abstract_method_handler expected the lock to be held. Now that method is deleted, we don't need to acquire the lock.

ashu-mehra · 2025-09-02T14:53:11Z

@vnkozlov @adinn thanks for the review. Integrating it now.

ashu-mehra · 2025-09-02T14:53:16Z

/integrate

openjdk · 2025-09-02T14:54:54Z

Going to push as commit 444a8fa.
Since your change was applied there have been 78 commits pushed to the master branch:

a029245: 8365983: Tests should throw SkippedException when SCTP not supported
7103543: 8366063: Parallel: Refactor copy_unmarked_to_survivor_space
1feb9bd: 8365557: Parallel: Refactor ParallelScavengeHeap::mem_allocate_work
... and 75 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/124575b4c2b52328a8efddb40e67057a53b44a04...master

Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts.

openjdk · 2025-09-02T14:55:05Z

@ashu-mehra Pushed as commit 444a8fa.

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

8365501: Remove speical AdapterHandlerEntry for abstract methods

b0cf055

Signed-off-by: Ashutosh Mehra <[email protected]>

openjdk bot added hotspot [email protected] rfr Pull request is ready for review labels Aug 13, 2025

vnkozlov reviewed Aug 13, 2025

View reviewed changes

vnkozlov approved these changes Aug 14, 2025

View reviewed changes

openjdk bot added the ready Pull request is ready to be integrated label Aug 14, 2025

openjdk bot added rfr Pull request is ready for review and removed ready Pull request is ready to be integrated rfr Pull request is ready for review labels Aug 14, 2025

Merge branch 'master' into remove-abstract_method_handler

cd8b85f

vnkozlov reviewed Aug 27, 2025

View reviewed changes

src/hotspot/share/oops/method.cpp Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

Address review comment - swap conditions

eb64118

Signed-off-by: Ashutosh Mehra <[email protected]>

vnkozlov approved these changes Aug 27, 2025

View reviewed changes

ashu-mehra changed the title ~~8365501: Remove speical AdapterHandlerEntry for abstract methods~~ 8365501: Remove special AdapterHandlerEntry for abstract methods Aug 28, 2025

openjdk bot added the ready Pull request is ready to be integrated label Aug 28, 2025

adinn approved these changes Sep 1, 2025

View reviewed changes

openjdk bot added the integrated Pull request has been integrated label Sep 2, 2025

openjdk bot closed this Sep 2, 2025

openjdk bot removed ready Pull request is ready to be integrated rfr Pull request is ready for review labels Sep 2, 2025

ashu-mehra deleted the remove-abstract_method_handler branch September 2, 2025 19:34

8365501: Remove special AdapterHandlerEntry for abstract methods #26764

8365501: Remove special AdapterHandlerEntry for abstract methods #26764

Uh oh!

Conversation

ashu-mehra commented Aug 13, 2025 • edited by openjdk bot Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Progress

Issue

Reviewers

Reviewing

Uh oh!

bridgekeeper bot commented Aug 13, 2025

Uh oh!

openjdk bot commented Aug 13, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

openjdk bot commented Aug 13, 2025

Uh oh!

mlbridge bot commented Aug 13, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Webrevs

Uh oh!

vnkozlov left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

vnkozlov left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

ashu-mehra commented Aug 14, 2025

Uh oh!

ashu-mehra commented Aug 14, 2025

Uh oh!

ashu-mehra commented Aug 27, 2025

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

vnkozlov left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

ashu-mehra commented Aug 28, 2025

Uh oh!

ashu-mehra commented Aug 28, 2025

Uh oh!

vnkozlov commented Aug 28, 2025

Uh oh!

ashu-mehra commented Aug 29, 2025

Uh oh!

vnkozlov commented Aug 29, 2025

Uh oh!

adinn left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

adinn Sep 1, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

ashu-mehra Sep 2, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

ashu-mehra commented Sep 2, 2025

Uh oh!

ashu-mehra commented Sep 2, 2025

Uh oh!

openjdk bot commented Sep 2, 2025

Uh oh!

openjdk bot commented Sep 2, 2025

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

ashu-mehra commented Aug 13, 2025 •

edited by openjdk bot

Loading

openjdk bot commented Aug 13, 2025 •

edited

Loading

mlbridge bot commented Aug 13, 2025 •

edited

Loading