Skip to content

More buffer tagging cleanup#984

Open
rbrchen wants to merge 4 commits intoopenjdk:code-reflectionfrom
rbrchen:cleanup
Open

More buffer tagging cleanup#984
rbrchen wants to merge 4 commits intoopenjdk:code-reflectionfrom
rbrchen:cleanup

Conversation

@rbrchen
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@rbrchen rbrchen commented Mar 26, 2026

Delete and refactor unnecessary buffer tagging code.

Also remove the @reflect annotation on S32Array::arrayView - this makes the buffer tagging break.


Progress

  • Change must not contain extraneous whitespace

Reviewing

Using git

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/babylon.git pull/984/head:pull/984
$ git checkout pull/984

Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/984
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.org/babylon.git pull/984/head

Using Skara CLI tools

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 984

View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 984

Using diff file

Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.org/babylon/pull/984.diff

Using Webrev

Link to Webrev Comment

@bridgekeeper
Copy link
Copy Markdown

bridgekeeper bot commented Mar 26, 2026

👋 Welcome back rbrchen! A progress list of the required criteria for merging this PR into code-reflection 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
Copy Markdown

openjdk bot commented Mar 26, 2026

@rbrchen 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:

More buffer tagging cleanup

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 4 new commits pushed to the code-reflection 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.

As you do not have Committer status in this project an existing Committer must agree to sponsor your change.

➡️ To flag this PR as ready for integration with the above commit message, type /integrate in a new comment. (Afterwards, your sponsor types /sponsor in a new comment to perform the integration).

@openjdk openjdk bot added ready Pull request is ready to be integrated rfr Pull request is ready for review labels Mar 26, 2026
@mlbridge
Copy link
Copy Markdown

mlbridge bot commented Mar 26, 2026

Webrevs

if (invokeOp != null) return invokeOp.result();
if (invokeOp != null) {
return invokeOp.result();
}
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

If this is null what do we return? Maybe we dont expect this ever to be the case. In which case shoudl we throw?

@@ -123,10 +127,14 @@ private static Value getRootValue(Op op) {
}
case JavaOp.InvokeOp invokeOp -> {
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

All of this would be easier I think if you used the Invoke wrapper.

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

Labels

ready Pull request is ready to be integrated rfr Pull request is ready for review

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants