-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5.6k
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
8265784: [C2] Hoisting of DecodeN leaves MachTemp inputs behind #3637
Conversation
👋 Welcome back mdoerr! A progress list of the required criteria for merging this PR into |
@TheRealMDoerr The following label will be automatically applied to this pull request:
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. |
Hi Martin, |
…nger assertion to PhaseCFG::verify()
…h would require more changes.
Webrevs
|
Moving additional TEMP and CONST? input edges to the same block is correct. |
Hi Vladimir, thanks for reviewing my PR. |
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.
Good.
@TheRealMDoerr 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 187 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.
Hi,
I think temp must go into a block that dominates both, tempb and block.
Do you know block always dominates tempb (after the if?)
Then you could add assert(block->dominates(tempb), "find legal posittion")
Best regards,
Goetz.
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.
LGTM
Hi Götz, thanks for reviewing! |
Thanks for the reviews! I'll integrate it tomorrow if everything's fine. |
/integrate |
@TheRealMDoerr Since your change was applied there have been 197 commits pushed to the
Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts. Pushed as commit 8e071c4. 💡 You may see a message that your pull request was closed with unmerged commits. This can be safely ignored. |
PPC64 and s390 have DecodeN implementations which use a MachTemp input. When LCM hoists the DecodeN, the MachTemp nodes reside in the old block, but should get hoisted together with the DecodeN node.
Same is true for load Base input which exists on s390 for example. Unfortunately, that's just a platform specific MachNode which is not nicely recognizable in LCM.
Progress
Issue
Reviewers
Reviewing
Using
git
Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk pull/3637/head:pull/3637
$ git checkout pull/3637
Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/3637
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk pull/3637/head
Using Skara CLI tools
Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 3637
View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 3637
Using diff file
Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/3637.diff