8330165: C2: make superword consistently use PhaseIdealLoop::register_new_node()

[rwestrel]

Another set of changes from 8275202. There are cases in superword
where new nodes are not assigned control. I believe they are harmless
currently because superword is the last pass of optimizations. I also
cleaned up the code so it always uses register_new_node(). There are
a couple places where intcon() should be used.

---

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-8330165: C2: make superword consistently use PhaseIdealLoop::register_new_node() (Enhancement - P5)

Reviewers

• Christian Hagedorn (@chhagedorn - Reviewer)
• Vladimir Kozlov (@vnkozlov - Reviewer)

Reviewing

Using git

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/18760/head:pull/18760
$ git checkout pull/18760

Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/18760
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/18760/head

Using Skara CLI tools

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 18760

View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 18760

Using diff file

Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/18760.diff

Webrev

Link to Webrev Comment

[bridgekeeper]

👋 Welcome back roland! A progress list of the required criteria for merging this PR into master will be added to the body of your pull request. There are additional pull request commands available for use with this pull request.

[openjdk]

@rwestrel 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:

8330165: C2: make superword consistently use PhaseIdealLoop::register_new_node()

Reviewed-by: chagedorn, kvn

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 122 new commits pushed to the master branch:

• 140f567: 8323220: Reassociate loop invariants involved in Cmps and Add/Subs
• a293bdf: 8330197: Make javac/diags/example release agnostic
• da75e01: 8330196: Make java/lang/invoke/defineHiddenClass/BasicTest release agnostic
• ddc3921: 8330103: Compiler memory statistics should keep separate records for C1 and C2
• 273df62: 8328792: Parallel: Refactor PSParallelCompact::summary_phase
• a3fecdb: 8329764: G1: Handle null references during verification first
• 60d88b7: 8330176: Typo in Linker javadoc
• 3f1d9c4: 8329257: AIX: Switch HOTSPOT_TOOLCHAIN_TYPE from xlc to gcc
• 5404b4e: 8330105: SharedRuntime::resolve* should respect interpreter-only mode
• d22d560: 8329864: TestLibGraal.java still crashes with assert(_stack_base != nullptr)
• ... and 112 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/18c925cd33d6f3b1d4365d582dddaa8426f41bea...master

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]

@rwestrel The following label will be automatically applied to this pull request:

• hotspot-compiler

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.

[mlbridge]

Webrevs

• 01: Full - Incremental (fabd851a)
• 00: Full (f85804cc)

[chhagedorn]

Good refactoring. Since you're using this pattern quite often, I was just wondering, if we should have a separate method register_new_node_with_ctrl_of() (or something like that) that does:

PhaseIdealLoop::register_new_node_with_ctrl_of(Node* new_node, Node* ctrl_of) {
  register_new_node(new_node, get_ctrl(ctrl_of));
}

And then:

phase()->register_new_node_with_ctrl_of(mask, p->at(0));

[rwestrel]

Good idea. I updated the change.

[chhagedorn]

That looks good to me, thanks for additionally updating other uses of this pattern!

[vnkozlov]

Good.

[rwestrel]

@chhagedorn @vnkozlov thanks for the reviews

[rwestrel]

/integrate

[openjdk]

Going to push as commit bfff02e.
Since your change was applied there have been 133 commits pushed to the master branch:

• e073d5b: 8329665: fatal error: memory leak: allocating without ResourceMark
• 6e77d91: 8330261: Clean up linking steps
• 61fa4d4: 8330351: Remove the SHARED_LIBRARY and STATIC_LIBRARY macros
• 56ff87a: 8330359: G1: Remove unused forward declaration in g1BlockOffsetTable.hpp
• 8a5b86c: 8196106: Support nested infinite or recursive flat mapped streams
• 58911cc: 8188784: javax/management/notification/BroadcasterSupportDeadlockTest.java - TEST FAILED: deadlock
• 97c1808: 8329099: Undocumented exception thrown by Instruction factory methods accepting Opcode
• def2577: 8330215: Trim working set for OldObjectSamples
• 2f11afd: 8330172: G1: Consolidate update_bot_for_block and update_bot_for_obj in HeapRegion
• 31a1f9c: 8307143: CredentialsCache.cacheName should not be static
• ... and 123 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/18c925cd33d6f3b1d4365d582dddaa8426f41bea...master

Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts.

[openjdk]

@rwestrel Pushed as commit bfff02e.

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