Request for reviews (XS): 7106944: assert(_pc == *pc_addr) failed may be too strong

[Vladimir Kozlov]

Yes, it looks good. But, Christian, can you show (call stack?) how we endup deoptimizing twice? How we enter 
deoptimization code twice?

Thanks,
Vladimir

On 11/2/11 10:01 AM, Tom Rodriguez wrote:
> Looks good.
>
> tom
>
> On Nov 2, 2011, at 8:53 AM, Christian Thalinger wrote:
>
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~twisti/7106944/
>>
>> 7106944: assert(_pc == *pc_addr) failed may be too strong
>> Reviewed-by:
>>
>> Sometimes we are already deoptimizing a frame when we request another
>> deoptimization of the same frame.  This makes the assert to fail.
>>
>> The fix is to add a check to the assert that the return address is the
>> same that we are going to patch.
>>
>> src/cpu/x86/vm/frame_x86.cpp
>>
>