8357056: RISC-V: Asm fixes - load/store width

[robehn]

Hi, please consider.

While working on #25252, I notice:

• Major op code was just repeat
• Width coded in binary
• Stores have mixed up rs1 and rs2
• Bonus, fsd used a macro for no reason

I think this improves readability.

Tested tier1

Thanks, Robbin

---

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-8357056: RISC-V: Asm fixes - load/store width (Enhancement - P5)

Reviewers

• Ludovic Henry (@luhenry - Committer) Review applies to 841f85da
• Fei Yang (@RealFYang - Reviewer) Review applies to 2d658948
• Feilong Jiang (@feilongjiang - Committer)
• Hamlin Li (@Hamlin-Li - Reviewer)

Reviewing

Using git

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/25253/head:pull/25253
$ git checkout pull/25253

Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/25253
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/25253/head

Using Skara CLI tools

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 25253

View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 25253

Using diff file

Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/25253.diff

Using Webrev

Link to Webrev Comment

[bridgekeeper]

👋 Welcome back rehn! 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]

@robehn 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:

8357056: RISC-V: Asm fixes - load/store width

Reviewed-by: fjiang, mli, luhenry, fyang

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 7 new commits pushed to the master branch:

• 1e57648: 8350457: Implement JEP 519: Compact Object Headers
• 26053fe: 8357406: Remove usages of jdk.tracePinnedThreads system property from httpclient tests
• c0665ef: 8354323: Safeguard SwitchBootstraps.typeSwitch when used outside the compiler
• ... and 4 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/8184ce39a8a732352ee841fed09cae905d27643c...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]

@robehn 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

• 02: Full - Incremental (aec6511a)
• 01: Full - Incremental (2d658948)
• 00: Full (841f85da)

[RealFYang]

Nice cleanup! Thanks.

[RealFYang]

Latest version looks great! Thanks.

[feilongjiang]

Overall looks good! With one minor suggestion!

[Hamlin-Li]

I think the original rd/rs is easier to understand the meaning of the parameters. Although the changed one is consistent with the specification, it seems to me that it is more error-prone to use it, maybe it's just my feeling?

[robehn]

I can imagine something like:
void _sd(Register Rs2_value, Register Rs1_address, const int32_t offset)

[feilongjiang]

I think the original rd/rs is easier to understand the meaning of the parameters. Although the changed one is consistent with the specification, it seems to me that it is more error-prone to use it, maybe it's just my feeling?

Currently, we only use the store instructions with Address or address, which is less confusing.

[Hamlin-Li]

I can imagine something like: void _sd(Register Rs2_value, Register Rs1_address, const int32_t offset)

It's much better!
As a API, maybe void _sd(Register value, Register address, const int32_t offset) is fair enough, but either is good to me.

[robehn]

I'm fine either way. But as all other instructions plainly have Rd/Rs1/rs2, I think we should address all or none. E.g. maybe it's better to handle in a seperate issue?

[Hamlin-Li]

I'm fine either way. But as all other instructions plainly have Rd/Rs1/rs2, I think we should address all or none. E.g. maybe it's better to handle in a seperate issue?

Sure, make sense to me.

[feilongjiang]

Thanks!

[robehn]

Thanks all for reviewing! I created https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8357566.

[robehn]

/integrate

[openjdk]

Going to push as commit daa8eda.
Since your change was applied there have been 59 commits pushed to the master branch:

• 7002233: 8351950: C2: AVX512 vector assembler routines causing SIGFPE / no valid evex tuple_table entry
• f825a51: 7046003: Default value of Authenticator.getRequestingURL() is not specified
• ed4cd2a: 8356989: Unexpected null in C2 compiled code
• ... and 56 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/8184ce39a8a732352ee841fed09cae905d27643c...master

Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts.

[openjdk]

@robehn Pushed as commit daa8eda.

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