[aarch64-port-dev ] RFR: Fix AArch64 build failure after JDK-8062808 backport

[Andrew Haley]

On 1/4/21 10:46 AM, Aleksey Shipilev wrote:
> On 1/4/21 11:40 AM, Andrew Haley wrote:
>> On 1/4/21 9:27 AM, Aleksey Shipilev wrote:
>>> So, a trivial fix is to put in the missing addition:
>>>
>>> diff -r 76dace090781 src/cpu/aarch64/vm/c1_LIRAssembler_aarch64.cpp
>>> --- a/src/cpu/aarch64/vm/c1_LIRAssembler_aarch64.cpp    Tue Dec 15 20:18:10 2020 +0100
>>> +++ b/src/cpu/aarch64/vm/c1_LIRAssembler_aarch64.cpp    Mon Jan 04 04:24:42 2021 -0500
>>> @@ -207,6 +207,7 @@
>>>          return Address(base, tmp, Address::lsl(addr->scale()));
>>>        }
>>>      }
>>> +  return Address();
>>>    }
>>
>> Ah, another bad code change caused by a bogus compiler diagnostic. (Not the
>> compiler's problem, it's because we don't mark ShouldNotReachHere() as
>> not returning.
>>
>> OK, but there really should be a ShouldNotReachHere() or equiv before
> 
> There is ShouldNotReachHere(), on the path that falls-through:
>  
> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah/hotspot/file/tip/src/cpu/aarch64/vm/c1_LIRAssembler_aarch64.cpp#l199

Yeah, I know.

> I would have put "return" near that "ShouldNotReachHere", but decided to instead match the code that 
> ships in all other releases, i.e. the shape that was pushed to JDK 9.

Sure. There should have been some sort of comment or a ShouldNotReachHere()
by the return Address() in the JDK 9 commit too.

I agree, please commit what you have.

-- 
Andrew Haley  (he/him)
Java Platform Lead Engineer
Red Hat UK Ltd. <https://www.redhat.com>
https://keybase.io/andrewhaley
EAC8 43EB D3EF DB98 CC77 2FAD A5CD 6035 332F A671