On Fri, 19 Sep 2025 09:25:56 GMT, Emanuel Peter <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Jatin Bhateja has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional >> commit since the last revision: >> >> Review comments resolutions > > test/hotspot/jtreg/compiler/intrinsics/TestPopCountValueTransforms.java line > 54: > >> 52: static final long rand_bndL2 = G.longs().next(); >> 53: static final long rand_popcL1 = G.uniformLongs(0, 32).next(); >> 54: static final long rand_popcL2 = G.uniformLongs(0, 32).next(); > > Why did you limit the range for longs to 32? Can it not go up to 64? > I asked for an explanation (in a code comment) of those that you restrict > here, which you have not done, and just "resolved" it instead: > https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/27075#discussion_r2351166568 If you do restrict it, then at least go over the range a little bit. Why? You check `Integer.bitCount(num) < rand_popcI2`. The max value you get here is 32, so we could never get a constant folding case for the range `0..32`. Maybe that is ok, but we potentially miss a chance to find something we did not even anticipate. That is why I would recommend **not** to constrain the values, unless you really have a good reason and write it down in a code comment. ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/27075#discussion_r2362316509
