Skip to content
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

8253457: Remove unimplemented register stack functions #300

Closed
wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

coleenp
Copy link
Contributor

@coleenp coleenp commented Sep 22, 2020

Please review removed functions left over from Itanium.

Ran tier1 testing on Oracle platforms (linux-x64, macos-x64, windows-x64 and linux-aarch64) and built on linux-arm32,linux-ppc64le-debug,linux-s390x-debug,linux-x64-zero.

Thanks,
Coleen


Progress

  • Change must not contain extraneous whitespace
  • Commit message must refer to an issue
  • Change must be properly reviewed

Issue

  • JDK-8253457: Remove unimplemented register stack functions

Reviewers

Download

$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk pull/300/head:pull/300
$ git checkout pull/300

@bridgekeeper
Copy link

bridgekeeper bot commented Sep 22, 2020

👋 Welcome back coleenp! 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 openjdk bot added the rfr Pull request is ready for review label Sep 22, 2020
@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Sep 22, 2020

@coleenp The following label will be automatically applied to this pull request: hotspot-runtime.

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 (add|remove) "label" command.

@openjdk openjdk bot added the hotspot-runtime hotspot-runtime-dev@openjdk.org label Sep 22, 2020
@mlbridge
Copy link

mlbridge bot commented Sep 22, 2020

Webrevs

Copy link
Member

@iklam iklam left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good overall to me. I can see all these functions with no callers. Should they also be removed? I saw you removed only for thread_linux_arm.hpp.

./os_cpu/linux_aarch64/thread_linux_aarch64.hpp:  void  set_last_Java_fp(intptr_t* fp)           { _anchor.set_last_Java_fp(fp);   }
./os_cpu/linux_x86/thread_linux_x86.hpp:  void  set_last_Java_fp(intptr_t* fp)           { _anchor.set_last_Java_fp(fp);   }
./os_cpu/windows_x86/thread_windows_x86.hpp:  void  set_last_Java_fp(intptr_t* fp)           { _anchor.set_last_Java_fp(fp);   }
./os_cpu/linux_arm/thread_linux_arm.hpp:  void  set_last_Java_fp(intptr_t* fp)           { _anchor.set_last_Java_fp(fp);  }
./os_cpu/bsd_x86/thread_bsd_x86.hpp:  void  set_last_Java_fp(intptr_t* fp)           { _anchor.set_last_Java_fp(fp);   }
./cpu/aarch64/javaFrameAnchor_aarch64.hpp:  void set_last_Java_fp(intptr_t* fp)                { OrderAccess::release(); _last_Java_fp = fp; }
./cpu/arm/javaFrameAnchor_arm.hpp:  void set_last_Java_fp(intptr_t* fp)                { _last_Java_fp = fp; }
./cpu/x86/javaFrameAnchor_x86.hpp:  void set_last_Java_fp(intptr_t* fp)                { _last_Java_fp = fp; }

./share/runtime/javaFrameAnchor.hpp:  void set_last_Java_pc(address pc)              { _last_Java_pc = pc; }
./os_cpu/linux_arm/thread_linux_arm.hpp:  void  set_last_Java_pc(address pc)             { _anchor.set_last_Java_pc(pc);  }

I am not sure about last_Java_fp() as I didn't check thoroughly.

The other 5 removed function seem OK to me -- they don't do anything. The only exception is the *_zero.hpp versions that had some asserts, but I guess these asserts never caught anything since they don't exist on other ports anyway.

src/hotspot/os_cpu/linux_arm/thread_linux_arm.hpp Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Copy link
Member

@iklam iklam left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Sep 22, 2020

@coleenp This change now passes all automated pre-integration checks. In addition to the automated checks, the change must also fulfill all project specific requirements

After integration, the commit message will be:

8253457: Remove unimplemented register stack functions

Reviewed-by: iklam, dholmes, shade
  • If you would like to add a summary, use the /summary command.
  • To credit additional contributors, use the /contributor command.
  • To add additional solved issues, use the /issue command.

Since the source branch of this PR was last updated there have been 15 commits pushed to the master branch:

  • e4d0e5a: 8253516: ZGC: Remove card table functions
  • 3fe5886: 8252696: Loop unswitching may cause out of bound array load to be executed
  • 226faa5: 8253241: Update comment on java_suspend_self_with_safepoint_check()
  • bd67975: 8253349: Remove unimplemented SharedRuntime::native_method_throw_unsupported_operation_exception_entry
  • bddb822: 8253240: No javadoc for DecimalFormatSymbols.hashCode()
  • c68a31d: 8253499: Problem list runtime/cds/DeterministicDump.java
  • 93a2018: 8252195: AWT Accessibility API nested classes rely on default constructors
  • 426c904: 8253392: remove PhaseCCP_DCE declaration
  • 65af837: 8253496: [BACKOUT] JDK-8253208 Move CDS related code to a separate class
  • 581f0f2: 8253493: Shenandoah: Remove ShenandoahSerialRoot definition
  • ... and 5 more: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/compare/8c02bdbf13bc8258bbdb6c45fd3b3ba4c6f8971b...master

As there are no conflicts, your changes will automatically be rebased on top of these commits when integrating. If you prefer to avoid automatic rebasing, please merge master into your branch, and then specify the current head hash when integrating, like this: /integrate e4d0e5af4d93d7e08997cc8333c1c84c5007e9ec.

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

@openjdk openjdk bot added the ready Pull request is ready to be integrated label Sep 22, 2020
Copy link
Member

@dholmes-ora dholmes-ora left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Good cleanup! Thanks.

@coleenp
Copy link
Contributor Author

coleenp commented Sep 23, 2020

/integrate

@coleenp coleenp closed this Sep 23, 2020
@coleenp coleenp reopened this Sep 23, 2020
@coleenp
Copy link
Contributor Author

coleenp commented Sep 23, 2020

/integrate

@openjdk openjdk bot closed this Sep 23, 2020
@openjdk openjdk bot added integrated Pull request has been integrated and removed ready Pull request is ready to be integrated rfr Pull request is ready for review labels Sep 23, 2020
@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Sep 23, 2020

@coleenp Since your change was applied there have been 15 commits pushed to the master branch:

  • e4d0e5a: 8253516: ZGC: Remove card table functions
  • 3fe5886: 8252696: Loop unswitching may cause out of bound array load to be executed
  • 226faa5: 8253241: Update comment on java_suspend_self_with_safepoint_check()
  • bd67975: 8253349: Remove unimplemented SharedRuntime::native_method_throw_unsupported_operation_exception_entry
  • bddb822: 8253240: No javadoc for DecimalFormatSymbols.hashCode()
  • c68a31d: 8253499: Problem list runtime/cds/DeterministicDump.java
  • 93a2018: 8252195: AWT Accessibility API nested classes rely on default constructors
  • 426c904: 8253392: remove PhaseCCP_DCE declaration
  • 65af837: 8253496: [BACKOUT] JDK-8253208 Move CDS related code to a separate class
  • 581f0f2: 8253493: Shenandoah: Remove ShenandoahSerialRoot definition
  • ... and 5 more: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/compare/8c02bdbf13bc8258bbdb6c45fd3b3ba4c6f8971b...master

Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts.

Pushed as commit b8ea80a.

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

@coleenp coleenp deleted the base branch September 23, 2020 11:54
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
hotspot-runtime hotspot-runtime-dev@openjdk.org integrated Pull request has been integrated
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants