review (XS) for 6982533: Crash in ~StubRoutines::jbyte_fill with AggressiveOpts enabled
Tom Rodriguez
tom.rodriguez at oracle.com
Tue Sep 7 11:05:05 PDT 2010
On Sep 7, 2010, at 10:49 AM, Vladimir Kozlov wrote:
> Looks good but could we also check (in assert?) that address type is array pointer?
I considered adding that as an early check but I wanted an explicit check that we found the index to confirm the shape of the address expression. I could add an early weed out test:
--- a/src/share/vm/opto/loopTransform.cpp Fri Sep 03 13:31:03 2010 -0700
+++ b/src/share/vm/opto/loopTransform.cpp Tue Sep 07 11:04:07 2010 -0700
@@ -2417,6 +2417,8 @@ bool PhaseIdealLoop::match_fill_loop(Ide
Node* value = n->in(MemNode::ValueIn);
if (!lpt->is_invariant(value)) {
msg = "variant store value";
+ } else if (!_igvn.type(n->in(MemNode::Address))->isa_aryptr()) {
+ msg = "not array address";
}
store = n;
store_value = value;
tom
>
> Thanks,
> Vladimir
>
> Tom Rodriguez wrote:
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~never/6982533
>> 6982533: Crash in ~StubRoutines::jbyte_fill with AggressiveOpts enabled
>> Reviewed-by:
>> The logic for matching a byte fill is missing a check for the use of
>> the index. It normally happens as part of the check for a shift
>> expression but since a byte array doesn't have a shift the check is
>> missed. The fix is to make the index check explicit. The reason it
>> didn't always crash was because of differences in heap size caused by
>> ergonomics. With a 16m heap it crashes on any machine. Tested with
>> failing test case.
>> src/share/vm/opto/loopTransform.cpp
More information about the hotspot-compiler-dev
mailing list