On Wed, 22 Oct 2025 01:57:44 GMT, David Holmes <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Thanks for the reviews. >> >> I have updated the html to read "requires hsdis". >> >> Regarding checking for `amd64` vs. `x86_64`, I found two cases where one of >> `x86_64` and `amd64` is checked but not the other: >> >> >> test/hotspot/jtreg/compiler/c2/irTests/RotateLeftNodeLongIdealizationTests.java >> 34: * @requires os.arch == "x86_64" | os.arch == "aarch64" | (os.arch == >> "riscv64" & vm.cpu.features ~= ".*zbb.*") >> >> test/hotspot/jtreg/compiler/c2/irTests/RotateLeftNodeIntIdealizationTests.java >> 34: * @requires os.arch == "x86_64" | os.arch == "aarch64" | (os.arch == >> "riscv64" & vm.cpu.features ~= ".*zbb.*") >> >> >> I checked the C++ sources for `RotateLeftNode::Value` and >> `RotateLeftNode::Ideal`, I couldn't find any platform-specific logic that >> would justify excluding `amd64`. I have updated both tests to include >> `amd64` in their `@requires`. >> >> Is there a specific `x86_64` vs. `amd64` check in C you would like to point >> out? >> >> For the total annihilation of the `amd64` naming, I have cut an issue at >> [JDK-8370339](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8370339). > >> For the total annihilation of the amd64 naming, I have cut an issue at >> [JDK-8370339](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8370339). > > I meant this for the SA code, not the JDK in its entirety. For historical > reasons we still define os.arch as "amd64" on Linux and Windows. We need to > fix tests that are using the wrong `@requires` values. I filed https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8370378 for 3 compiler tests. ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/27844#discussion_r2450222785
