On Thu, 21 May 2026 21:23:33 GMT, Sandhya Viswanathan
<[email protected]> wrote:
>> Volodymyr Paprotski has updated the pull request incrementally with one
>> additional commit since the last revision:
>>
>> comments, next round done!
>
> src/hotspot/cpu/x86/stubGenerator_x86_64_sha3.cpp line 83:
>
>> 81: ATTRIBUTE_ALIGNED(64) static const uint64_t avx2_rotate_consts[] = {
>> 82: // X0 X0 X1 X3 X1 X3 X2 X4 X2 X4
>> 83: 1, 28, 1, 28, 62, 27, 62, 27, // A0_,
>> A1A3, A2A4
>
> A0_ should be removed from comment as there are no corresponding entries?
I think I was just providing a 'cheatsheet' to the AVX2 register-to-state
layout, so that the indentation/even-odd would make sense, but removed it in
any case.
> src/hotspot/cpu/x86/stubGenerator_x86_64_sha3.cpp line 1055:
>
>> 1053: __ movq(T0, Address(buf, 5 * 8)); //b5
>> 1054: __ movq(T1, Address(buf, 15 * 8)); //b15
>> 1055: __ vshufpd(T0, T0/*b5*/, T1/*b15*/, 0b0000, vector_len); //b5A15
>
> Comment should be //b5b15 ?
You are right, it should be `//b5b15`, really cant remember what I was thinking
here..
> src/hotspot/cpu/x86/stubGenerator_x86_64_sha3.cpp line 1061:
>
>> 1059: __ movq(T0, Address(buf, 10 * 8)); //b10
>> 1060: __ vpxor(T0, T0, A10A20, vector_len);
>> 1061: __ vshufpd(A10A20, T0/*A10*/, A10A20, 0b1010, vector_len);
>> //b10A20
>
> Looks to me that this vshufpd could be removed.
> Or if retained, comment should be //A10A20 ?
for some reason, I missed that movq is a 64-bit load (and zero the upper half).
Thanks, fixed. Also rerun fuzz tests; pass.
-------------
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/31125#discussion_r3313284957
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/31125#discussion_r3313354739
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/31125#discussion_r3313379594
