On Mon, 27 Mar 2023 14:43:04 GMT, Matias Saavedra Silva <[email protected]>
wrote:
>> The current structure used to store the resolution information for
>> invokedynamic, ConstantPoolCacheEntry, is difficult to interpret due to its
>> ambigious fields f1 and f2. This structure can hold information for fields,
>> methods, and invokedynamics and each of its fields can hold different types
>> of values depending on the entry.
>>
>> This enhancement proposes a new structure to exclusively contain
>> invokedynamic information in a manner that is easy to interpret and easy to
>> extend. Resolved invokedynamic entries will be stored in an array in the
>> constant pool cache and the operand of the invokedynamic bytecode will be
>> rewritten to be the index into this array.
>>
>> Any areas that previously accessed invokedynamic data from
>> ConstantPoolCacheEntry will be replaced with accesses to this new array and
>> structure. Verified with tier1-9 tests.
>>
>> The PPC was provided by @reinrich and the RISCV port was provided by
>> @DingliZhang and @zifeihan.
>>
>> This change supports the following platforms: x86, aarch64, PPC, and RISCV
>
> Matias Saavedra Silva has updated the pull request incrementally with one
> additional commit since the last revision:
>
> RISCV patch and aarch64 improvement
`{tier1, tier2} X {fast debug, slow debug, release}` testing done for s390x. PR
seems clean.
@matias9927 please include port for s390x from this commit:
https://github.com/offamitkumar/jdk/commit/a582f32f97aefba33cebaf4ace540681dfc0eff5
Thanks
src/hotspot/cpu/ppc/templateInterpreterGenerator_ppc.cpp line 652:
> 650: // Scale the index to be the entry index *
> sizeof(ResolvedInvokeDynamicInfo)
> 651: __ sldi(size, size, log2i_exact(sizeof(ResolvedIndyEntry)));
> 652: __ add(cache, cache, size);
@reinrich Is there any specific reason, why you're not calling
load_resolved_indy_entry() method here. On s390x build/changes are stable even
with calling that helper method.
-------------
Marked as reviewed by amitkumar (Author).
PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/12778#pullrequestreview-1361010070
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/12778#discussion_r1150566670
