RFR(XS): 8026959: assert(!n->pinned() || n->is_MachConstantBase()) failed: only pinned MachConstantBase node is expected here

[Igor Veresov]

Would it be prudent to verify (via an assert) all these assumptions about the graph shape you list in the comments?

igor

On Oct 21, 2013, at 6:39 AM, Rickard Bäckman <rickard.backman at oracle.com> wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> can I have reviews for this small change?
> The problem is we are moving a Phi node that is both input and output to
> a MathExactNode.
> 
> Unfortunately cr.openjdk.java.net is down at the moment. I'm pasting the
> diff below.
> 
> diff --git a/src/share/vm/opto/compile.cpp b/src/share/vm/opto/compile.cpp
> --- a/src/share/vm/opto/compile.cpp
> +++ b/src/share/vm/opto/compile.cpp
> @@ -3004,6 +3004,10 @@
>       if (result != NULL) {
>         for (DUIterator_Fast jmax, j = result->fast_outs(jmax); j < jmax; j++) {
>           Node* out = result->fast_out(j);
> +          // Phi nodes shouldn't be moved. They would only match below if they
> +          // had the same control as the MathExactNode. The only time that
> +          // would happen is if the Phi is also an input to the MathExact
> +          if (!out->is_Phi()) {
>           if (out->in(0) == NULL) {
>             out->set_req(0, non_throwing);
>           } else if (out->in(0) == ctrl) {
> @@ -3012,6 +3016,7 @@
>         }
>       }
>     }
> +    }
>     break;
>   default:
>     assert( !n->is_Call(), "" );
> 
> 
> Thank you
> /R