8263582: WB_IsMethodCompilable ignores compiler directives #3195

chhagedorn · 2021-03-25T15:00:39Z

While playing around with WB_IsMethodCompilable together with compileonly I ran into some surprising results for methods that should never be compiled (not part of compileonly): isMethodCompilable returns true instead of false when such an excluded method was not yet tried to be compiled.

The reason for it is that WB_IsMethodCompilable directly checks CompilationPolicy::can_be_compiled() which calls Method::is_not_compilable(). However, the ExcludeOption compiler directive is only evaluated lazily upon a compilation attempt. Therefore, if a method was not tried to be compiled, yet, Method::is_not_compilable() always returns false, regardless of any set compiler directive.

I therefore suggest to additionally check the ExcludeOption in WB_IsMethodCompilable. I also cleaned up some wrong use of CompLevel_any and CompLevel_all as suggested by @veresov: CompLevel_any should only be used to query the state as in is_*() methods and CompLevel_all when changing the state is in set_*() methods.

Thanks,
Christian

Progress

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

Issue

JDK-8263582: WB_IsMethodCompilable ignores compiler directives

Reviewers

Igor Veresov (@veresov - Reviewer) ⚠️ Review applies to 952049c
Vladimir Kozlov (@vnkozlov - Reviewer)
Nils Eliasson (@neliasso - Reviewer)

Reviewing

Using git

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk pull/3195/head:pull/3195
$ git checkout pull/3195

Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/3195
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk pull/3195/head

Using Skara CLI tools

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 3195

View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 3195

Using diff file

Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/3195.diff

bridgekeeper · 2021-03-25T15:01:31Z

👋 Welcome back chagedorn! 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 · 2021-03-25T15:02:55Z

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

hotspot

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 · 2021-03-25T15:06:41Z

Webrevs

01: Full - Incremental (67e31f2)
00: Full (952049c)

chhagedorn · 2021-03-25T15:16:36Z

/label add hotspot-compiler

openjdk · 2021-03-25T15:17:21Z

@chhagedorn
The hotspot-compiler label was successfully added.

veresov · 2021-03-25T15:32:42Z

test/hotspot/jtreg/compiler/whitebox/TestMethodCompilableCompilerDirectives.java

+    // returns false regardless of any compiler directives if m was not yet tried to be compiled. The compiler directive ExcludeOption
+    // to prevent a compilation is evaluated lazily and is only applied when a compilation for m is attempted.
+    // Another problem is that Method::is_not_compilable() only returns true for CompLevel_any if C1 AND C2 cannot compile it.
+    // This means that a compilation of m must have been attempted for C1 and C2 before WB::isMethodCompilable(m, CompLevl_any) will


A typo "CompLevl_any" -> "CompLevel_any".

Thanks, fixed it.

openjdk · 2021-03-25T15:34:48Z

@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:

8263582: WB_IsMethodCompilable ignores compiler directives

Reviewed-by: iveresov, kvn, neliasso

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 128 new commits pushed to the master branch:

21e7402: 8263707: C1 RangeCheckEliminator support constant array and NewMultiArray
2ad6f2d: 8263896: Make not_suspended parameter from ObjectMonitor::exit() have default value
b652198: 8264429: Test runtime/cds/appcds/VerifyWithDefaultArchive.java assumes OpenJDK build
2c9365d: 8264271: Avoid creating non_oop_word oops
daeca3f: 8262958: (fs) UnixUserDefinedFileAttributeView cleanup
af02883: 8264191: Javadoc search is broken in Internet Explorer
6e74c3a: 8264193: Remove TRAPS parameters for modules and defaultmethods
ee5e00b: 8264279: Shenandoah: Missing handshake after JDK-8263427
ac604a1: 8264374: Shenandoah: Remove leftover parallel reference processing argument
f3726a8: 8264020: Optimize double negation elimination
... and 118 more: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/compare/7b81f8e34b228772e4b05a7826801d31cbef640f...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.

chhagedorn · 2021-03-25T15:38:40Z

Thanks Igor for your review!

vnkozlov

I would like to hear from @neliasso why ExcludeOption is treated so specially ().
Why m->is_not_compilable() returns false when ExcludeOption is used?

vnkozlov · 2021-03-25T17:19:13Z

src/hotspot/share/prims/whitebox.cpp

+  if (comp_level == CompLevel_any) {
+    // Both compilers could have ExcludeOption set. Check all combinations.
+    bool excluded_c1 = is_excluded_for_compiler(CompileBroker::compiler1(), mh);
+    bool excluded_c2 = is_excluded_for_compiler(CompileBroker::compiler2(), mh);


May be use next instead as we do in WhiteBox::compile_method at line #992:
AbstractCompiler *comp = CompileBroker::compiler(comp_level);

The problem is that CompileBroker::compiler() returns NULL for CompLevel_any. And even if it returned one compiler, I also need to check the other one to decide if the method is completly non-compilable. That's why I added this additional logic for CompLevel_any.

I thought exclude command does not specify which compilation level (and corresponding compiler) is disabled - it disables all compilations.
But may be it is not true for directives. @neliasso, please, correct me if I am wrong.

I thought exclude command does not specify which compilation level (and corresponding compiler) is disabled - it disables all compilations.
But may be it is not true for directives. @neliasso, please, correct me if I am wrong.

You can set Exclude differently for c1 and c2. That's sometimes very handy when creating more complex combinations of directives.

Changes good then.

neliasso

Looks good.

neliasso · 2021-03-30T12:06:36Z

src/hotspot/share/prims/whitebox.cpp

+  if (comp_level == CompLevel_any) {
+    // Both compilers could have ExcludeOption set. Check all combinations.
+    bool excluded_c1 = is_excluded_for_compiler(CompileBroker::compiler1(), mh);
+    bool excluded_c2 = is_excluded_for_compiler(CompileBroker::compiler2(), mh);


I thought exclude command does not specify which compilation level (and corresponding compiler) is disabled - it disables all compilations.
But may be it is not true for directives. @neliasso, please, correct me if I am wrong.

You can set Exclude differently for c1 and c2. That's sometimes very handy when creating more complex combinations of directives.

vnkozlov · 2021-03-30T16:13:59Z

src/hotspot/share/prims/whitebox.cpp

+  if (comp_level == CompLevel_any) {
+    // Both compilers could have ExcludeOption set. Check all combinations.
+    bool excluded_c1 = is_excluded_for_compiler(CompileBroker::compiler1(), mh);
+    bool excluded_c2 = is_excluded_for_compiler(CompileBroker::compiler2(), mh);


Changes good then.

chhagedorn · 2021-03-31T06:32:27Z

Thanks @vnkozlov and @neliasso for your reviews!

chhagedorn · 2021-03-31T06:32:38Z

/integrate

openjdk · 2021-03-31T06:34:10Z

@chhagedorn Since your change was applied there have been 134 commits pushed to the master branch:

928fa5b: 8244540: Print more information with -XX:+PrintSharedArchiveAndExit
e073486: 8262093: java/util/concurrent/tck/JSR166TestCase.java failed "assert(false) failed: unexpected node"
815248a: 8264148: Update spec for exceptions retrofitted for exception chaining
353807c: 8263898: (fs) Files.newOutputStream on the "NUL" special device throws FileSystemException: "nul: Incorrect function" (win)
2bd80f9: 8264326: Modernize javax.script.ScriptEngineManager and related classes' implementation
b08d638: 8262503: Support records in Dynalink
21e7402: 8263707: C1 RangeCheckEliminator support constant array and NewMultiArray
2ad6f2d: 8263896: Make not_suspended parameter from ObjectMonitor::exit() have default value
b652198: 8264429: Test runtime/cds/appcds/VerifyWithDefaultArchive.java assumes OpenJDK build
2c9365d: 8264271: Avoid creating non_oop_word oops
... and 124 more: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/compare/7b81f8e34b228772e4b05a7826801d31cbef640f...master

Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts.

Pushed as commit ab6faa6.

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

chhagedorn added 2 commits March 23, 2021 09:12

8263582: WB_IsMethodCompilable ignores compiler directives

0004866

Fix some CompLevel_all to CompLevel_any

952049c

openjdk bot added the rfr Pull request is ready for review label Mar 25, 2021

openjdk bot added the hotspot hotspot-dev@openjdk.org label Mar 25, 2021

openjdk bot added the hotspot-compiler hotspot-compiler-dev@openjdk.org label Mar 25, 2021

veresov reviewed Mar 25, 2021

View reviewed changes

veresov approved these changes Mar 25, 2021

View reviewed changes

openjdk bot added the ready Pull request is ready to be integrated label Mar 25, 2021

fix typo

67e31f2

vnkozlov reviewed Mar 25, 2021

View reviewed changes

neliasso approved these changes Mar 30, 2021

View reviewed changes

vnkozlov approved these changes Mar 30, 2021

View reviewed changes

openjdk bot closed this Mar 31, 2021

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 Mar 31, 2021

chhagedorn deleted the JDK-8263582 branch May 31, 2021 10:19

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

8263582: WB_IsMethodCompilable ignores compiler directives #3195

8263582: WB_IsMethodCompilable ignores compiler directives #3195

chhagedorn commented Mar 25, 2021 •

edited by openjdk bot

bridgekeeper bot commented Mar 25, 2021

openjdk bot commented Mar 25, 2021

mlbridge bot commented Mar 25, 2021 •

edited

chhagedorn commented Mar 25, 2021

openjdk bot commented Mar 25, 2021

veresov Mar 25, 2021

chhagedorn Mar 25, 2021

openjdk bot commented Mar 25, 2021 •

edited

chhagedorn commented Mar 25, 2021

vnkozlov left a comment

vnkozlov Mar 25, 2021

chhagedorn Mar 26, 2021

vnkozlov Mar 26, 2021

neliasso Mar 30, 2021

vnkozlov Mar 30, 2021

neliasso left a comment

neliasso Mar 30, 2021

vnkozlov Mar 30, 2021

chhagedorn commented Mar 31, 2021

chhagedorn commented Mar 31, 2021

openjdk bot commented Mar 31, 2021

8263582: WB_IsMethodCompilable ignores compiler directives #3195

8263582: WB_IsMethodCompilable ignores compiler directives #3195

Conversation

chhagedorn commented Mar 25, 2021 • edited by openjdk bot

Progress

Issue

Reviewers

Reviewing

bridgekeeper bot commented Mar 25, 2021

openjdk bot commented Mar 25, 2021

mlbridge bot commented Mar 25, 2021 • edited

Webrevs

chhagedorn commented Mar 25, 2021

openjdk bot commented Mar 25, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

openjdk bot commented Mar 25, 2021 • edited

chhagedorn commented Mar 25, 2021

vnkozlov left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

neliasso left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

chhagedorn commented Mar 31, 2021

chhagedorn commented Mar 31, 2021

openjdk bot commented Mar 31, 2021

chhagedorn commented Mar 25, 2021 •

edited by openjdk bot

mlbridge bot commented Mar 25, 2021 •

edited

openjdk bot commented Mar 25, 2021 •

edited