RFR(XS) 8011415: CTW on Sparc: assert(lrg.lo_degree()) failed:

[Vladimir Kozlov]

Niclas,

Thank you for looking. The changes are good.

Thanks,
Vladimir

On 10/10/13 5:32 AM, Niclas Adlertz wrote:
> I couldn't find any place where it expects a 16bit value only.
>
> Here's an updated
> webrev:http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~adlertz/JDK-8011415/webrev01/
>
> Kind Regards,
> Niclas Adlertz
>
> On 2013-10-10 09:08, Niclas Adlertz wrote:
>> Hi Vladimir, thank you.
>>
>>> Can you use 0xFFFFF format?
>> Sure, I can switch to hexadecimal format in the code. The new value
>> already is 0xFFFFF (but in decimal representation).
>>
>>> It will *8 but it should be fine since we need a big number.
>> Won't it be * 16? I meant it will be * 16, not doubled. Sorry for the
>> confusion.
>>
>>> I am little worry that it (mask_size()) is used somewhere in a code
>>> which expects 16bit value only. Could you look?
>> I will look for uses of mask_size() to see if I can find uses where it
>> needs 16bit.
>>
>> I will send out an updated webrev soon.
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> Kind Regards,
>> Niclas Adlertz
>>
>> On 2013-10-10 03:29, Vladimir Kozlov wrote:
>>> Can you use 0xFFFFF format? It will *8 but it should be fine since we
>>> need a big number.
>>> I am little worry that it (mask_size()) is used somewhere in a code
>>> which expects 16bit value only. Could you look?
>>>
>>> Note for reviewers:
>>>
>>> lo_degree() { return degree() <= degrees_of_freedom(); }
>>> degrees_of_freedom() { return mask_size() - _num_regs; }
>>> degree() { return _eff_degree; }
>>>    uint _eff_degree; // Effective degree: Sum of neighbors _num_regs
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Vladimir
>>>
>>> On 10/9/13 3:08 PM, Niclas Adlertz wrote:
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> When compiling very big methods, in this particular case a method of
>>>> 60k+ nodes, a live range 'l' with mask.is_AllStack() == true can still
>>>> have lo_degree() == false. This because the _mask_size of 'l' can be at
>>>> most 65535, at the same time 'l' is interfering with so many other live
>>>> ranges that the value of _eff_degree becomes bigger than 65535.
>>>>
>>>> To solve this I've doubled that max value of _mask_size.
>>>> Appreciate feedback on this. Should we increase it by more? Or find
>>>> another solution for this? Or file a future enhancement bug to solve
>>>> this in a cleaner way later on?
>>>>
>>>> (I've ran CTW + JPRT tests)
>>>>
>>>> WEBREV: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~adlertz/JDK-8011415/webrev00/
>>>> JBS: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8011415
>>>>
>>>> Kind Regards,
>>>> Niclas Adlertz
>>
>