RFR(S) 8032656: Tag the MachSpillCopies with purpose information

[Vladimir Kozlov]

On 1/28/14 3:18 AM, Niclas Adlertz wrote:
> Hi Vladimir,
>
> Thank you for your response.
> That is a possibility as well.
>
> By using an enum I still have the problem of deciding what to return in Name().
> I could have either
> * an array of const char* with the names and index into it by using the enum when returning a name
> * a switch-case on the enums in the Name() method.

Switch by enum in Name().

>
> However, I think sub-classing the MachSpillCopyNode looks cleaner.
> The sub-classing approach could also be of use in a product build when debugging a crash and we want to check what type
> of node we are at.

You can determine type by enum value too.

Thanks,
Vladimir

>
> If it's ok with you, I'll wait and see what the others think. If more people think the enum approach is better I can use
> enums instead.
>
> Kind Regards,
> Niclas Adlertz
>
> On 2014-01-28 11:50, Vladimir Ivanov wrote:
>> Niclas,
>>
>> Why didn't you introduce an enum instead and pass the reason to constructor? Introducing 13 subclasses just to
>> overload Name() method in debug builds looks like an overkill to me.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Vladimir Ivanov
>>
>> On 1/28/14 2:07 PM, Niclas Adlertz wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> When debugging or visualizing spills/splits/moves in C2 it's hard to
>>> know what caused an insertion of a certain MachSpillCopy. I've made this
>>> easier by creating subclasses of the MachSpillCopyNode.
>>>
>>> webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~adlertz/JDK-8032656/webrev00/
>>> bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8032656
>>>
>>> Kind Regards,
>>> Niclas Adlertz
>