RFR(M): 8027422: assert(_gvn.type(obj)->higher_equal(tjp)) failed: cast_up is no longer needed

[Roland Westrelin]

Thanks, Vladimir.

Roland.

On Jan 14, 2014, at 4:25 PM, Vladimir Kozlov <vladimir.kozlov at oracle.com> wrote:

> Looks good to me.
> 
> On 1/14/14 1:13 AM, Roland Westrelin wrote:
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~roland/8027422/webrev.02/
>> 
>> I fixed the verification code at the end of Compile::remove_speculative_types(), used this format everywhere:
>> t->filter(_type, true /* include_speculative */);
>> 
>> renamed NodeHash::check_speculative_types() to NodeHash::check_no_speculative_types(), added PhaseIterGVN::check_no_speculative_types() and now call it from the verification code of Compile::remove_speculative_types().
>> 
>> Do I need more than 1 review for this?
> 
> Yes, you need an other review for this change. Ask Chris or Igor.
> 
> Thanks,
> Vladimir
> 
>> 
>> Roland.
>> 
>> 
>> On Jan 13, 2014, at 11:03 AM, Roland Westrelin <roland.westrelin at oracle.com> wrote:
>> 
>>>> compile.cpp: new verification code (under ASSERT) at the end of remove_speculative_types() checks only the root node - nothing else is pushed on worklist. Also add comment to this new code.
>>> 
>>> Thanks for catching that.
>>> Is:
>>> // Verify that after the IGVN is over no speculative type has resurfaced
>>> good as a comment?
>>> 
>>>> Passing 'true' parameter is not very informative. You can use local variable:
>>>> 
>>>> bool include_speculative = true;
>>>> t->filter(_type, include_speculative);
>>>> 
>>>> An other way to make code more informative is to add a comment to parameter:
>>>> 
>>>> t->filter(_type, true /* include_speculative */);
>>>> 
>>>> Either way is fine.
>>> 
>>> Will do one of these.
>>> 
>>> Thanks,
>>> Roland.
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Vladimir
>>>> 
>>>> On 1/10/14 1:46 AM, Roland Westrelin wrote:
>>>>> Hi Vladimir,
>>>>> 
>>>>> Here is a new webrev for this:
>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~roland/8027422/webrev.01/
>>>>> 
>>>>> I fixed the issues you mentioned in your review.
>>>>> I added a call to remove_speculative() to the ConNode constructor. When a node becomes constant, its speculative part can be not null. The IGVN doesn’t kill ConNodes so without a call to remove_speculative() a ConNode with a speculative part can sneak past the call to Compile::remove_speculative_types().
>>>>> I also added a verification method:
>>>>> NodeHash::check_speculative_types()
>>>>> to check that no TypeNode with a speculative type is still in the IGVN hash table after Compile::remove_speculative_types()
>>>>> 
>>>>> Roland.
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Nov 19, 2013, at 8:49 PM, Vladimir Kozlov <vladimir.kozlov at oracle.com> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On 11/19/13 11:45 AM, Roland Westrelin wrote:
>>>>>>> Thanks for reviewing this, Vladimir.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Nov 19, 2013, at 1:34 AM, Vladimir Kozlov <vladimir.kozlov at oracle.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Next 2 places in type.cpp pass 'true' to meet() unconditionally:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 1929     return TypeAry::make(_elem->meet(a->_elem, true),
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 3812     const TypeAry *tary = _ary->meet(tap->_ary, true)->is_ary();
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Should TypeAryPtr::remove_speculative() also clean _speculative in element's type?
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> You’re right. It probably should.
>>>>>>> So I need to add a remove_speculative() method to TypeAry. Then the 2 places where true is passed to meet() for TypeAry don’t matter anymore because remove_speculative() is called from meet() and remove_speculative now has an effect on TypeAry, right?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Right, passing 'true' will work in all cases then.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> Vladimir
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Could you make printing code with 'this_t' aligned again in Type::meet()?
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Sure.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Roland.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> thanks,
>>>>>>>> Vladimir
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On 11/18/13 1:15 PM, Roland Westrelin wrote:
>>>>>>>>> The root of the problem is that during the null check when the type of obj is improved in GraphKit::cast_not_null():
>>>>>>>>> const Type *t_not_null = t->join(TypePtr::NOTNULL, true);
>>>>>>>>> The join with TypePtr::NOTNULL is not applied to the speculative part. In fact, no meet between a TypeOopPtr and a TypePtr modifies the speculative part. One way to fix it would be to apply the meet with a TypePtr to the speculative part as well as the standard part of the type which I tried: then we need to move the _speculative field up in TypePtr and modify all operations on TypePtr to operate on _speculative so that the type system remains symmetric.
>>>>>>>>> In many places where we mix a TypePtr with a TypeOopPtr we actually don’t care about the speculative part. I changed the following operations on Type:
>>>>>>>>> higher_equal()
>>>>>>>>> meet()
>>>>>>>>> join()
>>>>>>>>> filter()
>>>>>>>>> so that by default they don’t return a result that include the speculative part of the type. Where we need the speculative part of the type, we have to explicitly request it.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> I also fixed a problem with Type nodes with a _type of TypeNarrowOop that wouldn’t drop the speculative part of the type during Compile::remove_speculative_types().
>>>>>>>>> I included small clean ups that Mikael suggested privately (dropped the duplicate check for res->isa_oopptr() in TypeOopPtr::meet, make remove_speculative not go through the exercise of creating a new type if speculative is NULL).
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~roland/8027422/webrev.00/
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Roland.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>> 
>>