Skip to content

8305093: Linker cache should not take layout names into account #13562

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Closed
wants to merge 47 commits into from

Conversation

JornVernee
Copy link
Member

@JornVernee JornVernee commented Apr 20, 2023

Strip names from the function descriptors used in linkage requests. The names are not important for classification, and this will allow the cached MethodHandle/UpcallStubFactory to be shared across linkage request with the same structure, but with layouts that have different names.

I also have another implementation that avoids copying all the layouts, and instead re-implemented equals and hashCode in the LinkRequest wrapper: pr/13079...JornVernee:jdk:NoNameCache But, this seems too complex. Linking code is not very performance sensitive, so I instead went with a simpler approach in this patch.


Progress

  • Change must be properly reviewed (1 review required, with at least 1 Reviewer)
  • Change must not contain extraneous whitespace
  • Commit message must refer to an issue

Issue

  • JDK-8305093: Linker cache should not take layout names into account

Reviewers

Reviewing

Using git

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/13562/head:pull/13562
$ git checkout pull/13562

Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/13562
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/13562/head

Using Skara CLI tools

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 13562

View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 13562

Using diff file

Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/13562.diff

Webrev

Link to Webrev Comment

minborg and others added 30 commits March 17, 2023 16:40
Co-authored-by: Paul Sandoz <paul.d.sandoz@googlemail.com>
Co-authored-by: Paul Sandoz <paul.d.sandoz@googlemail.com>
Fix ULE when intializing LibFallback
Co-authored-by: Maurizio Cimadamore <54672762+mcimadamore@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Maurizio Cimadamore <54672762+mcimadamore@users.noreply.github.com>
@JornVernee JornVernee marked this pull request as ready for review April 21, 2023 00:39
@openjdk openjdk bot added the rfr Pull request is ready for review label Apr 21, 2023
@mlbridge
Copy link

mlbridge bot commented Apr 21, 2023

Webrevs

@openjdk-notifier openjdk-notifier bot changed the base branch from pr/13079 to master April 27, 2023 09:05
@openjdk-notifier
Copy link

The parent pull request that this pull request depends on has now been integrated and the target branch of this pull request has been updated. This means that changes from the dependent pull request can start to show up as belonging to this pull request, which may be confusing for reviewers. To remedy this situation, simply merge the latest changes from the new target branch into this pull request by running commands similar to these in the local repository for your personal fork:

git checkout NoNameCache2
git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git master
git merge FETCH_HEAD
# if there are conflicts, follow the instructions given by git merge
git commit -m "Merge master"
git push

@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Apr 27, 2023

@JornVernee this pull request can not be integrated into master due to one or more merge conflicts. To resolve these merge conflicts and update this pull request you can run the following commands in the local repository for your personal fork:

git checkout NoNameCache2
git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git master
git merge FETCH_HEAD
# resolve conflicts and follow the instructions given by git merge
git commit -m "Merge master"
git push

@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Apr 27, 2023

⚠️ @JornVernee This pull request contains merges that bring in commits not present in the target repository. Since this is not a "merge style" pull request, these changes will be squashed when this pull request in integrated. If this is your intention, then please ignore this message. If you want to preserve the commit structure, you must change the title of this pull request to Merge <project>:<branch> where <project> is the name of another project in the OpenJDK organization (for example Merge jdk:master).

@openjdk openjdk bot added the merge-conflict Pull request has merge conflict with target branch label Apr 27, 2023
@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Apr 27, 2023

@JornVernee This change now passes all automated pre-integration checks.

ℹ️ This project also has non-automated pre-integration requirements. Please see the file CONTRIBUTING.md for details.

After integration, the commit message for the final commit will be:

8305093: Linker cache should not take layout names into account

Reviewed-by: mcimadamore

You can use pull request commands such as /summary, /contributor and /issue to adjust it as needed.

At the time when this comment was updated there had been 1 new commit pushed to the master branch:

  • d437c61: 8305672: Surprising definite assignment error after JDK-8043179

Please see this link for an up-to-date comparison between the source branch of this pull request and the master branch.
As there are no conflicts, your changes will automatically be rebased on top of these commits when integrating. If you prefer to avoid this automatic rebasing, please check the documentation for the /integrate command for further details.

➡️ To integrate this PR with the above commit message to the master branch, type /integrate in a new comment.

@openjdk openjdk bot added ready Pull request is ready to be integrated and removed merge-conflict Pull request has merge conflict with target branch labels Apr 27, 2023
JornVernee and others added 3 commits April 28, 2023 01:49
Co-authored-by: ExE Boss <3889017+ExE-Boss@users.noreply.github.com>
@JornVernee
Copy link
Member Author

/integrate

@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented May 1, 2023

Going to push as commit 67dd841.
Since your change was applied there has been 1 commit pushed to the master branch:

  • d437c61: 8305672: Surprising definite assignment error after JDK-8043179

Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts.

@openjdk openjdk bot added the integrated Pull request has been integrated label May 1, 2023
@openjdk openjdk bot closed this May 1, 2023
@openjdk openjdk bot removed the ready Pull request is ready to be integrated label May 1, 2023
@JornVernee JornVernee deleted the NoNameCache2 branch May 1, 2023 13:41
@openjdk openjdk bot removed the rfr Pull request is ready for review label May 1, 2023
@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented May 1, 2023

@JornVernee Pushed as commit 67dd841.

💡 You may see a message that your pull request was closed with unmerged commits. This can be safely ignored.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
core-libs core-libs-dev@openjdk.org integrated Pull request has been integrated
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants