> @vnkozlov asked me to guard some debug AD file rules in `#ifdef ASSERT`. > https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/14785#discussion_r1349391130 > > We discovered that the `ASSERT` and `PRODUCT` are not yet passed to ADLC, and > hence they are always considered `undefined`. Hence, all of these `ifdef` > blocks would always be ignored. > > **Solution** > I added the flags to `make/hotspot/gensrc/GensrcAdlc.gmk`, just like in > `make/hotspot/lib/JvmFlags.gmk`. > > As @erikj79 commented: we should probably unify this. But I leave that to the > build team. > > **Testing** > With this code you can see what flags are passed to ADLC: > > --- a/src/hotspot/share/adlc/main.cpp > +++ b/src/hotspot/share/adlc/main.cpp > @@ -56,6 +56,11 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[]) > // Check for proper arguments > if( argc == 1 ) usage(AD); // No arguments? Then print usage > > + for( int i = 1; i < argc; i++ ) { // For all arguments > + char *s = argv[i]; // Get option/filename > + fprintf(stderr, "ARGV[%d] %s\n", i, s); > + } > + > // Read command line arguments and file names > for( int i = 1; i < argc; i++ ) { // For all arguments > char *s = argv[i]; // Get option/filename > > > On `linux-x64` I get: > > ARGV[1] -q > ARGV[2] -T > ARGV[3] -DLINUX=1 > ARGV[4] -D_GNU_SOURCE=1 > ARGV[5] -g > ARGV[6] -DAMD64=1 > ARGV[7] -D_LP64=1 > ARGV[8] -DNDEBUG > ARGV[9] -DPRODUCT > > > And on `linux-x64-debug` I get: > > ARGV[1] -q > ARGV[2] -T > ARGV[3] -DLINUX=1 > ARGV[4] -D_GNU_SOURCE=1 > ARGV[5] -g > ARGV[6] -DAMD64=1 > ARGV[7] -D_LP64=1 > ARGV[8] -DASSERT > > > I verified that the `#ifdef` work as expected, by adding this code to > `src/hotspot/cpu/x86/x86.ad`: > > #ifdef ASSERT > #ifdef PRODUCT > control > #endif > #endif > > #ifdef ASSERT > xxx > #endif > > #ifdef PRODUCT > yyy > #endif > > When compiling, I get complaints for `yyy` on `linux-x64` and for `xxx` on > `linux-x64-debug`. But since `ASSERT` and `PRODUCT` never occur together, we > never get complaints about `control`. > > **Running tier1-3 and stress testing ...**
Emanuel Peter has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision: add comments like Vladimir requested ------------- Changes: - all: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/16178/files - new: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/16178/files/b2875032..299ac4a3 Webrevs: - full: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=16178&range=01 - incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=16178&range=00-01 Stats: 3 lines in 1 file changed: 3 ins; 0 del; 0 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/16178.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/16178/head:pull/16178 PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/16178
