On Thu, 18 Jun 2026 08:25:02 GMT, Martin Doerr <[email protected]> wrote:
>> src/hotspot/cpu/ppc/macroAssembler_ppc.cpp line 3424: >> >>> 3422: call_VM_leaf(CAST_FROM_FN_PTR(address, >>> BarrierSetRuntime::value_copy), src, dst, inline_layout_info); >>> 3423: } >>> 3424: } >> >> Other platforms define this in `BarrierSetAssembler::flat_field_copy()`. Is >> there a reason we don't do the same on ppc64? > > I don't remember. And I don't know why it is in BarrierSetAssembler. We could > move it on demand. Every difference to other platforms bears risks, e.g. that ppc64 is missed in changes to related code. Also it is a burden when comparing the platforms. The difference should bring value to justify the costs. Without that the difference should be eliminated. As mentioned before I strongly advocated for that rule. There are already too many violations and I wouldn't want to accumulate even more. So I'd like to ask you to eliminate the diff or add a comment that explains why it is worth it. ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/valhalla/pull/2549#discussion_r3434411110
