-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5.7k
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
8315637: JDK-8314249 broke libgraal #15575
Conversation
👋 Welcome back iklam! A progress list of the required criteria for merging this PR into |
Thanks for the extra cleanup and tests. |
@iklam 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 15 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.
Looks good, thanks for this change! I have one small question, but otherwise approved.
* @param opcode the opcode of the instruction for which the lookup is being performed | ||
* @return name as {@link String} | ||
*/ | ||
private String getNameOf(int rawIndex, int opcode) { |
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.
This method, and getSignatureOf()
seem to be unused but is it possible that they could have use in the future?
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.
These were private methods that had a single caller. All they did was to forward the call to CompilerToVM, so I removed them so that I didn't need to worry about renaming their parameters.
In the future, after we get rid of which
and cpci
, maybe we can refactor the code to have better organization, and possibly bring back these methods.
Thanks @dougxc and @matias9927 for the review. The new code passed tiers 1 and 2. I also successfully built libgraal with this patch. |
Going to push as commit 0c865a7.
Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts. |
Please review this change in JVMCI. The actual functional change is essentially the same as the patch provided by @dougxc in JDK-8315637 -- convert the
rawIndex
tocpci
only if the bytecode is INVOKE{VIRTUAL,SPECIAL,STATIC,INTERFACE}.The rest of the changes is to rename the parameters from
rawIndex
towhich
, so we know the correct type of index is passed. I also added a test case.(This code should be much simpler after JDK-8301993 is complete: we won't have
cpci
anymore and allwhich
can be replaced withrawInex
).Progress
Issue
Reviewers
Reviewing
Using
git
Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/15575/head:pull/15575
$ git checkout pull/15575
Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/15575
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/15575/head
Using Skara CLI tools
Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 15575
View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 15575
Using diff file
Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15575.diff
Webrev
Link to Webrev Comment