8368961: Remove redundant checks in ciField.cpp

[linzihao1999]

Remove redundant check in 'trust_final_non_static_fields' ciField.cpp

Remove:

1. java_lang_System check
2. is_box_klass check
3. java_lang_String check

---

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-8368961: Remove redundant checks in ciField.cpp (Enhancement - P5)

Reviewers

• Benoît Maillard (@benoitmaillard - Committer)
• Anton Seoane Ampudia (@anton-seoane - Author)

Reviewing

Using git

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/28191/head:pull/28191
$ git checkout pull/28191

Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/28191
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/28191/head

Using Skara CLI tools

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 28191

View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 28191

Using diff file

Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/28191.diff

Using Webrev

Link to Webrev Comment

[bridgekeeper]

👋 Welcome back linzihao1999! 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]

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

[openjdk]

@linzihao1999 The following label will be automatically applied to this pull request:

• hotspot-compiler

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]

Webrevs

• 01: Full - Incremental (36f8bce1)
• 00: Full (215e71a2)

[benoitmaillard]

Thanks for making this cleanup @linzihao1999, this looks rather reasonable and trivial. I have submitted testing and will come back with the results.

[liach]

@linzihao1999 I noted there is another more comprehensive issue for this function: https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8368961

There are a total of 3 redundant checks in this function that can be removed. If you want to update this patch, feel free to update the issue for the PR, and include the cleanup for all 3 redundant checks.

[linzihao1999]

@linzihao1999 I noted there is another more comprehensive issue for this function: https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8368961

There are a total of 3 redundant checks in this function that can be removed. If you want to update this patch, feel free to update the issue for the PR, and include the cleanup for all 3 redundant checks.

Sure, I will update this change.

[anton-seoane]

I just saw this (I had assigned myself JDK-8368961, but didn't start already). I appears that there were two "similar" issues... I'll unassign myself and run some testing on this final version of the PR, although it looks trivial and correct. I'll come back with results!

[anton-seoane]

Looks good to me

[anton-seoane]

@linzihao1999 please note that you will need a "capital R" Reviewer to approve your changes before being able to integrate (you can see the required progress in the body of your PR)

[linzihao1999]

Thank your everyone!

@liach Can you help to sponsor this change?