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

8267846: [lworld] JIT support for the L/Q model (step 1) #431

Closed
wants to merge 3 commits into from

Conversation

TobiHartmann
Copy link
Member

@TobiHartmann TobiHartmann commented May 28, 2021

After #409 and #414 have been integrated, we need to fix the JIT code as well. This mostly means re-applying the old changes from 22dd0da1 and e895128f and adjust them to the current implementation.

All compiler tests now pass except for TestNullableInlineTypes, TestNullableArrays and TestIntrinsics which need reflection support. The corresponding C2 intrinsics are still broken. I'll fix them with JDK-8267932 once reflection support is available.

Thanks,
Tobias


Progress

  • Change must not contain extraneous whitespace

Issue

  • JDK-8267846: [lworld] JIT support for the L/Q model (step 1)

Reviewers

Reviewing

Using git

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/valhalla pull/431/head:pull/431
$ git checkout pull/431

Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/431
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.java.net/valhalla pull/431/head

Using Skara CLI tools

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 431

View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 431

Using diff file

Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.java.net/valhalla/pull/431.diff

@bridgekeeper
Copy link

bridgekeeper bot commented May 28, 2021

👋 Welcome back thartmann! A progress list of the required criteria for merging this PR into lqagain will be added to the body of your pull request. There are additional pull request commands available for use with this pull request.

@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented May 28, 2021

@TobiHartmann 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:

8267846: [lworld] JIT support for the L/Q model (step 1)

Reviewed-by: fparain

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 no new commits pushed to the lqagain branch. If another commit should be pushed before you perform the /integrate command, your PR will be automatically rebased. If you prefer to avoid any potential automatic rebasing, please check the documentation for the /integrate command for further details.

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

@mlbridge
Copy link

mlbridge bot commented May 28, 2021

Webrevs

if (type->is_obj_array_klass()) {
// Due to array covariance, the runtime type might be a flattened array.
if (type->is_obj_array_klass() && !type->as_obj_array_klass()->is_elem_null_free()) {
// The runtime type of [LMyValue might be [QMyValue due to [QMyValue <: [LMyValue.
Copy link
Collaborator

@fparain fparain May 28, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

if type->is_obj_array_klass() is true and type->as_obj_array_klass()->is_elem_null_free() is also true, the method returns false, is it the expected behavior?

Copy link
Member Author

@TobiHartmann TobiHartmann May 31, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yes, because in that case we have a null-free but non-flattened array. Right?

Copy link
Collaborator

@fparain fparain May 31, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Correct. Got it.

Copy link
Collaborator

@fparain fparain left a comment

I cannot review changes in C2 or CI typeFlow, but changes other changes in CI and C1 look good to me.

Fred

@TobiHartmann
Copy link
Member Author

TobiHartmann commented May 31, 2021

Thanks for the review, Fred!

@TobiHartmann
Copy link
Member Author

TobiHartmann commented May 31, 2021

/integrate

@openjdk openjdk bot closed this May 31, 2021
@openjdk openjdk bot added integrated and removed ready rfr labels May 31, 2021
@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented May 31, 2021

@TobiHartmann Pushed as commit 477ecf5.

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

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
2 participants