On Fri, 9 Oct 2026 06:22:43 GMT, Richard Reingruber <[email protected]> wrote:

>> Implement suggestions in https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8387577. 
>> This PR uses "approximate" pc that matches the registration offset of oops 
>> map.
>> 
>> 
>> Testing - tier1 and tier2 test run
>> 
>> make test TEST=":tier1 :tier2" CONF=linux-s390x-server-fastdebug
>> ==============================
>> Test summary
>> ==============================
>>    TEST                                              TOTAL  PASS  FAIL ERROR 
>>  SKIP   
>>>> jtreg:test/hotspot/jtreg:tier1                     3887  3411     8     0  
>>>>  468 <<
>>    jtreg:test/jdk:tier1                               2656  2605     0     0 
>>    51   
>>    jtreg:test/langtools:tier1                         4775  4763     0     0 
>>    12   
>>    jtreg:test/jaxp:tier1                                 0     0     0     0 
>>     0   
>>    jtreg:test/lib-test:tier1                            41    41     0     0 
>>     0   
>>>> jtreg:test/hotspot/jtreg:tier2                     1059   846     3     0  
>>>>  210 <<
>>>> jtreg:test/jdk:tier2                               4609  4351     2     0  
>>>>  256 <<
>>    jtreg:test/langtools:tier2                           14    12     0     0 
>>     2   
>>    jtreg:test/jaxp:tier2                               524   523     0     0 
>>     1   
>>    jtreg:test/docs:tier2                                 4     0     0     0 
>>     4   
>> ==============================
>> TEST FAILURE
>> 
>> Failed tests also fail on master branch for the same reason, 
>> test/hotspot/jtreg/runtime/ErrorHandling/CreateCoredumpOnCrash.java` passes 
>> after enabling `ulimit -c unlimited`.
>> 
>> 
>> ==============================
>> Test summary
>> ==============================
>>    TEST                                              TOTAL  PASS  FAIL ERROR 
>>  SKIP   
>>    
>> jtreg:test/hotspot/jtreg/compiler/c2/igvn/TestOptimizeTrichotomy.java#Xcomp
>>>>                                                       1     0     1     0  
>>>>    0 <<
>>    
>> jtreg:test/hotspot/jtreg/compiler/c2/igvn/TestOptimizeTrichotomy.java#vanilla
>>>>                                                       1     0     1     0  
>>>>    0 <<
>>    
>> jtreg:test/hotspot/jtreg/compiler/escapeAnalysis/TestBCEscapeAnalyzerOverflow.java
>>>>                                                       1     0     1     0  
>>>>    0 <<
>>    jtreg:test/hotspot/jtreg/compiler/gcbarriers/TestZGCBarrierElision.java#Z
>>>>                                                       1     0     1     0  
>>>>    0 <<
>>    
>> jtreg:test/hotspot/jtreg/compiler/loopopts/superword/TestDoNotFilterNaNSummands.java
>>>>           ...
>
> src/hotspot/os_cpu/linux_s390/javaThread_linux_s390.cpp line 36:
> 
>> 34:   address pc = _anchor.last_Java_pc();
>> 35: 
>> 36: #ifdef ASSERT
> 
> `pc == null` is valid here when a c2 runtime stub called into the vm (I 
> explained it in this [PR 
> comment](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/31441#discussion_r3441548556)). 
> You have to handle it outside of the `#ifdef ASSERT`.

Hi, 

Thanks a lot for the review!!! Just to clarify the change here - frame(sp) 
constructor[1] calls frame(sp, nullptr)[2][3]. It calls setup()[4] that sets 
the pc from own_abi()->return_pc if it is null[5]. 
We want to call it out directly, so pass own_abi()->return_pc here to the frame 
constructor?

[1] 
https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/5f92fecdd23672b8b1d2ee7bb0d25b726fb4c0e0/src/hotspot/cpu/s390/frame_s390.inline.hpp#L105
[2] 
https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/5f92fecdd23672b8b1d2ee7bb0d25b726fb4c0e0/src/hotspot/cpu/s390/frame_s390.hpp#L499
[3] 
https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/5f92fecdd23672b8b1d2ee7bb0d25b726fb4c0e0/src/hotspot/cpu/s390/frame_s390.inline.hpp#L99
[4] 
https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/5f92fecdd23672b8b1d2ee7bb0d25b726fb4c0e0/src/hotspot/cpu/s390/frame_s390.inline.hpp#L110
[5] 
https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/5f92fecdd23672b8b1d2ee7bb0d25b726fb4c0e0/src/hotspot/cpu/s390/frame_s390.inline.hpp#L39

-------------

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/33262#discussion_r4240106398

Reply via email to