RFR: 8163589: Add back intrinsic methods for event based tracing

[Robbin Ehn]

Thanks Markus!

/Robbin

On 08/12/2016 10:03 AM, Markus Gronlund wrote:
> Hi Robbin,
>
> I think this looks good, thanks for doing this.
>
> Thanks
> Markus
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Robbin Ehn
> Sent: den 11 augusti 2016 09:42
> To: Aleksey Shipilev; hotspot-compiler-dev at openjdk.java.net
> Subject: Re: RFR: 8163589: Add back intrinsic methods for event based tracing
>
> Hi Aleksey,
>
> Thanks for looking at this!
>
> On 08/10/2016 10:37 PM, Aleksey Shipilev wrote:
>> On 08/10/2016 05:05 PM, Robbin Ehn wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> In 8 we had this intrinsic, I'm adding it back Used for event based
>>> tracing.
>>>
>>> Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rehn/8163589/hotspot.01/webrev/
>>
>> Looks okay.
>>
>> *) c1_LIRGenerator:
>>
>> 3097   __ move(new LIR_Address(arg.result(),
>> java_lang_Class::klass_offset_in_bytes(), klass_pointer_type), klass,
>> info);
>>
>> Should klass_pointer_type be T_ADDRESS? It is an injected field of
>> intptr_t type, so current code seems fine, but T_ADDRESS matches the
>> existing uses in C1 better.
>
> Thanks, fixed.
>
>>
>> *) Are these different? Do we want to use one of these consistently?
>>
>> C1:
>> 3099   ByteSize offset = TRACE_KLASS_TRACE_ID_OFFSET;
>>
>> C2:
>> 3169   ByteSize offset = InstanceKlass::trace_id_offset();
>>
>
> Yes, thanks, fixed.
>
>>
>> *) Is the new intrinsic different from other catered by
>> LibraryCallKit::inline_native_Class_query?
>>
>
> We could cater this also there, but this is not as generic as those other intrinsic.
> Personally I would keep this separate. (we don't need to clobber inline_native_Class_query with ifdef, etc...) So if there is no strong opinions, I'll leave that as is.
>
> Incremental here:
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rehn/8163589/hotspot.01-02/webrev/
> Full here:
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rehn/8163589/hotspot.02/webrev/
>
> Thanks!
>
> (tested with JMH)
>
> /Robbin
>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> -Aleksey
>>
>>
>>