RFR (M): 8143925: Enhancing CounterMode.crypt() for AES

[Andrew Haley]

On 04/01/16 20:12, John Rose wrote:
> Corrected, thanks.  They don't need to be intrinsics if they optimize well.
> The point is that the library functions have code shapes which work well
> with the JIT.  For example, the multi-index checks might (as in Kishor's code)
> be implemented on top of the single-index check, without themselves being
> intrinsics.

We seem to be missing the opportunity to convert

  i >= 0 && i < size

into

  (unsigned)i < (unsigned)size

and this is, as far as I can see, the only real code-quality advantage of
the checkIndex intrinsic.  Could we not do this optimization and then
drop the C2 checkIndex intrinsic?

Andrew.