Re: RFR: JDK-8287061: Support for rematerializing scalar replaced objects participating in allocation merges [v7]

2023-04-05 Thread Vladimir Kozlov
On Wed, 5 Apr 2023 16:31:20 GMT, Cesar Soares Lucas wrote: >> Can I please get reviews for this PR? >> >> The most common and frequent use of NonEscaping Phis merging object >> allocations is for debugging information. The two graphs below show numbers >> for Renaissance and DaCapo benchmarks

Re: RFR: JDK-8305406: Add @spec tags in java.base/java.* (part 2) [v3]

2023-04-05 Thread Sean Mullan
On Wed, 5 Apr 2023 16:45:06 GMT, Jonathan Gibbons wrote: >> Please review a doc update to add `@spec` into the rest of the files in >> `java.base` (compared to those in >> [JDK-8305206](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8305206) PR #13248) > > Jonathan Gibbons has updated the pull request inc

Re: RFR: JDK-8305406: Add @spec tags in java.base/java.* (part 2) [v3]

2023-04-05 Thread Daniel Jeliński
On Wed, 5 Apr 2023 16:45:06 GMT, Jonathan Gibbons wrote: >> Please review a doc update to add `@spec` into the rest of the files in >> `java.base` (compared to those in >> [JDK-8305206](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8305206) PR #13248) > > Jonathan Gibbons has updated the pull request inc

Re: RFR: JDK-8305406: Add @spec tags in java.base/java.* (part 2) [v3]

2023-04-05 Thread Jonathan Gibbons
> Please review a doc update to add `@spec` into the rest of the files in > `java.base` (compared to those in > [JDK-8305206](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8305206) PR #13248) Jonathan Gibbons has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:

Re: RFR: JDK-8305406: Add @spec tags in java.base/java.* (part 2) [v2]

2023-04-05 Thread Jonathan Gibbons
On Wed, 5 Apr 2023 15:23:21 GMT, Daniel Jeliński wrote: >> Jonathan Gibbons has updated the pull request incrementally with one >> additional commit since the last revision: >> >> Update src/java.base/share/classes/java/security/cert/X509Certificate.java >> >> Co-authored-by: Daniel Jeli

Re: RFR: JDK-8305406: Add @spec tags in java.base/java.* (part 2) [v2]

2023-04-05 Thread Jonathan Gibbons
> Please review a doc update to add `@spec` into the rest of the files in > `java.base` (compared to those in > [JDK-8305206](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8305206) PR #13248) Jonathan Gibbons has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:

Re: RFR: JDK-8287061: Support for rematerializing scalar replaced objects participating in allocation merges [v7]

2023-04-05 Thread Cesar Soares Lucas
> Can I please get reviews for this PR? > > The most common and frequent use of NonEscaping Phis merging object > allocations is for debugging information. The two graphs below show numbers > for Renaissance and DaCapo benchmarks - similar results are obtained for all > other applications that

Re: RFR: 8304911: Use OperatingSystem enum in some modules [v3]

2023-04-05 Thread Iris Clark
On Wed, 5 Apr 2023 15:48:02 GMT, Roger Riggs wrote: >> With the addition of `jdk.internal.util.OperatingSystem` references to the >> system property `os.name` can be replaced. >> This PR exports jdk.internal.util to: >> - java.prefs, >> - java.security.jgss, >> - java.smartcardio, >> - jdk.c

Re: RFR: JDK-8287061: Support for rematerializing scalar replaced objects participating in allocation merges [v5]

2023-04-05 Thread Cesar Soares Lucas
On Wed, 5 Apr 2023 00:59:29 GMT, Cesar Soares Lucas wrote: >> Do you really need the boolean parameter ignore_merges here? >> It looks like we can use (safepoints == nullptr) instead? > >> It looks like we can use (safepoints == nullptr) instead? > > Yeap. Thanks. I don't know how I missed that

Re: RFR: JDK-8287061: Support for rematerializing scalar replaced objects participating in allocation merges [v4]

2023-04-05 Thread Cesar Soares Lucas
On Fri, 31 Mar 2023 18:38:43 GMT, Xin Liu wrote: >> I see, you use it in escape.cpp. Okay. I need to review changes there too. > > or you could construct a temporary PhaseMacroExpand object in EA. > > I see that you convert many member function to static so you can query in EA. > the only bloc

Re: RFR: JDK-8287061: Support for rematerializing scalar replaced objects participating in allocation merges [v5]

2023-04-05 Thread Cesar Soares Lucas
On Fri, 31 Mar 2023 18:24:45 GMT, Xin Liu wrote: > It looks like we can use (safepoints == nullptr) instead? Yeap. Thanks. I don't know how I missed that. - PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/12897#discussion_r1157909570

Re: RFR: JDK-8287061: Support for rematerializing scalar replaced objects participating in allocation merges [v5]

2023-04-05 Thread Cesar Soares Lucas
On Sat, 1 Apr 2023 00:44:55 GMT, Xin Liu wrote: > Do you consider to perform the transformation in MacroExpand? Your prior > changes have already removed NSR marks, ME/SR will consider 'ptn'. Yes, I actually did. However, that makes the changes much more complicated. I patched this method to r

Re: RFR: JDK-8287061: Support for rematerializing scalar replaced objects participating in allocation merges [v4]

2023-04-05 Thread Cesar Soares Lucas
On Sat, 25 Mar 2023 00:07:20 GMT, Vladimir Kozlov wrote: >> I had considered that but decided not to do it to prevent adding a new IR >> node. I'll give that a shot and update this thread with how it goes. > > It **will** complicate your DebugInfo code (packing/unpacking) information. > But I t

Re: RFR: JDK-8287061: Support for rematerializing scalar replaced objects participating in allocation merges [v4]

2023-04-05 Thread Cesar Soares Lucas
On Fri, 24 Mar 2023 19:02:57 GMT, Vladimir Kozlov wrote: >> Cesar Soares Lucas has updated the pull request incrementally with one >> additional commit since the last revision: >> >> Add support for SR'ing some inputs of merges used for field loads > > src/hotspot/share/code/debugInfo.hpp lin

Re: RFR: JDK-8287061: Support for rematerializing scalar replaced objects participating in allocation merges [v6]

2023-04-05 Thread Cesar Soares Lucas
> Can I please get reviews for this PR? > > The most common and frequent use of NonEscaping Phis merging object > allocations is for debugging information. The two graphs below show numbers > for Renaissance and DaCapo benchmarks - similar results are obtained for all > other applications that

Re: RFR: 8304911: Use OperatingSystem enum in some modules [v3]

2023-04-05 Thread Roger Riggs
> With the addition of `jdk.internal.util.OperatingSystem` references to the > system property `os.name` can be replaced. > This PR exports jdk.internal.util to: > - java.prefs, > - java.security.jgss, > - java.smartcardio, > - jdk.charsets, > - jdk.net, > - jdk.zipfs Roger Riggs has update

Re: RFR: JDK-8305406: Add @spec tags in java.base/java.* (part 2)

2023-04-05 Thread Daniel Jeliński
On Tue, 4 Apr 2023 19:46:32 GMT, Jonathan Gibbons wrote: > Please review a doc update to add `@spec` into the rest of the files in > `java.base` (compared to those in > [JDK-8305206](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8305206) PR #13248) Marked as reviewed by djelinski (Reviewer). src/java.b

Re: RFR: 8304911: Use OperatingSystem enum in some modules [v2]

2023-04-05 Thread ExE Boss
On Wed, 5 Apr 2023 14:32:03 GMT, Roger Riggs wrote: >> With the addition of `jdk.internal.util.OperatingSystem` references to the >> system property `os.name` can be replaced. >> This PR exports jdk.internal.util to: >> - java.prefs, >> - java.security.jgss, >> - java.smartcardio, >> - jdk.c

Re: RFR: 8304911: Use OperatingSystem enum in some modules [v2]

2023-04-05 Thread Alan Bateman
On Wed, 5 Apr 2023 14:18:54 GMT, Roger Riggs wrote: > Created [JDK-8305662](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8305662) to track > refactoring. > Will revert. Thanks, you can revert the qualified export in module-info and the additional grant in default.policy too. The interesting thing abou

Re: RFR: 8304911: Use OperatingSystem enum in some modules [v2]

2023-04-05 Thread Roger Riggs
> With the addition of `jdk.internal.util.OperatingSystem` references to the > system property `os.name` can be replaced. > This PR exports jdk.internal.util to: > - java.prefs, > - java.security.jgss, > - java.smartcardio, > - jdk.charsets, > - jdk.net, > - jdk.zipfs Roger Riggs has update

Re: RFR: 8304911: Use OperatingSystem enum in some modules

2023-04-05 Thread Roger Riggs
On Wed, 5 Apr 2023 08:37:27 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote: >> With the addition of `jdk.internal.util.OperatingSystem` references to the >> system property `os.name` can be replaced. >> This PR exports jdk.internal.util to: >> - java.prefs, >> - java.security.jgss, >> - java.smartcardio, >> - jdk.

Re: RFR: 8304911: Use OperatingSystem enum in some modules

2023-04-05 Thread Roger Riggs
On Wed, 5 Apr 2023 08:39:35 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote: >> With the addition of `jdk.internal.util.OperatingSystem` references to the >> system property `os.name` can be replaced. >> This PR exports jdk.internal.util to: >> - java.prefs, >> - java.security.jgss, >> - java.smartcardio, >> - jdk.

Re: RFR: 8302819: Remove JAR Index [v5]

2023-04-05 Thread Eirik Bjorsnos
On Wed, 5 Apr 2023 10:25:01 GMT, Lance Andersen wrote: > I am not convinced we need a test but to your point Jai, Eirik, lets handle > this as a separate PR/Issue and work through what we are hoping to > achieve/validate Good. Let's agree to handle testing of dusty 'index jars' separately from

Re: RFR: 8302819: Remove JAR Index [v5]

2023-04-05 Thread Lance Andersen
On Wed, 5 Apr 2023 07:05:11 GMT, Eirik Bjorsnos wrote: > > The new test that was planned for testing `JarFile` and `JarInputStream` > > when dealing with a jar containing a `META-INF/INDEX.LIST`, is that > > something that you want to be done as a separate PR/task? It's fine with me > > if you

Re: RFR: 8304911: Use OperatingSystem enum in some modules

2023-04-05 Thread Alan Bateman
On Tue, 4 Apr 2023 19:22:48 GMT, Roger Riggs wrote: > With the addition of `jdk.internal.util.OperatingSystem` references to the > system property `os.name` can be replaced. > This PR exports jdk.internal.util to: > - java.prefs, > - java.security.jgss, > - java.smartcardio, > - jdk.charsets

Re: RFR: 8302819: Remove JAR Index [v5]

2023-04-05 Thread Eirik Bjorsnos
On Wed, 5 Apr 2023 05:53:38 GMT, Jaikiran Pai wrote: > The new test that was planned for testing `JarFile` and `JarInputStream` when > dealing with a jar containing a `META-INF/INDEX.LIST`, is that something that > you want to be done as a separate PR/task? It's fine with me if you want that >