-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 6.1k
8314106: C2: assert(is_valid()) failed: must be valid after JDK-8305636 #15225
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
Conversation
👋 Welcome back chagedorn! A progress list of the required criteria for merging this PR into |
@chhagedorn The following label will be automatically applied to this pull request:
When this pull request is ready to be reviewed, an "RFR" email will be sent to the corresponding mailing list. If you would like to change these labels, use the /label pull request command. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looks good and trivial to me.
@chhagedorn 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:
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 56 new commits pushed to the
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 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Good.
Thanks Tobias and Vladimir for your reviews! |
/integrate |
Going to push as commit 1de5bf1.
Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts. |
@chhagedorn Pushed as commit 1de5bf1. 💡 You may see a message that your pull request was closed with unmerged commits. This can be safely ignored. |
In the failing test case, we are unswitching a loop for which we've already removed Parse Predicates with
Compile::cleanup_parse_predicates()
. We are wrongly checking if a predicate block is non-empty (i.e. find the Parse or Runtime Predicates) instead of only checking if we find the Parse Predicate:jdk/src/hotspot/share/opto/loopPredicate.cpp
Lines 448 to 453 in 23fe2ec
In the test case, we have a predicate block that contains Runtime Predicates from Loop Predication but no Parse Predicate anymore. Therefore, when trying to clone the non-existing Parse Predicate, we fail with the assertion because we do not have a valid Parse Predicate.
The fix is to only clone a Parse Predicate and the Assertion Predicates for a predicate block if the Parse Predicate is actually there. This is not entirely correct because we would also need to clone Assertion Predicates in the absence of Parse Predicates. But this was already wrong before JDK-8305636:
jdk/src/hotspot/share/opto/loopPredicate.cpp
Lines 598 to 612 in a38fdaf
This will only be fixed with the complete fix (JDK-8288981). The proposed fix here just reverts back to the old behavior before JDK-8305636.
Thanks,
Christian
Progress
Issue
Reviewers
Reviewing
Using
git
Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/15225/head:pull/15225
$ git checkout pull/15225
Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/15225
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/15225/head
Using Skara CLI tools
Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 15225
View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 15225
Using diff file
Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15225.diff
Webrev
Link to Webrev Comment