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
8251271: C2: Compile::_for_igvn list is corrupted after RenumberLiveNodes #713
Conversation
👋 Welcome back nhat-nguyen! A progress list of the required criteria for merging this PR into |
@nhat-nguyen 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. |
Webrevs
|
Looks good to me, but we need at least a reviewer to approve it. |
src/hotspot/share/opto/compile.cpp
Outdated
// Restore the original for_igvn pointer for subsequent uses. | ||
// Clear the for_igvn list because it may have irrelevant nodes | ||
// from the previous PhaseRenumberLive run. | ||
save_for_igvn->clear(); |
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.
Since PhaseRenumberLive::PhaseRenumberLive
moves nodes from for_igvn()
to new_worklist
, does it make more sense to drain original for_igvn()
worklist there?
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.
+1
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.
Thank you for the suggestion. I have updated the 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.
LGTM
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.
Looks good.
@nhat-nguyen 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 150 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. As you do not have Committer status in this project an existing Committer must agree to sponsor your change. Possible candidates are the reviewers of this PR (@iwanowww) but any other Committer may sponsor as well. ➡️ To flag this PR as ready for integration with the above commit message, type |
/integrate |
@nhat-nguyen |
/sponsor |
@TobiHartmann @nhat-nguyen Since your change was applied there have been 159 commits pushed to the
Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts. Pushed as commit 5fedfa7. 💡 You may see a message that your pull request was closed with unmerged commits. This can be safely ignored. |
I'm following up on this thread http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-compiler-dev/2020-September/039910.html
I'm clearing
for_igvn
before restoring as suggested by XinProgress
Testing
Issue
Reviewers
Download
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk pull/713/head:pull/713
$ git checkout pull/713