RFR: 8172169: Re-examine String field optionality

[Claes Redestad]

Hi Tobias,

On 2017-01-03 10:38, Tobias Hartmann wrote:
> Hi Claes,
>
> On 02.01.2017 17:54, Claes Redestad wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> hash_offset and coder_offset are set up to be optional, although there is
>> code that doesn't honor this (which would be a bug if the fields actually
>> *were* optional).  When the optionality is honored, there's a performance
>> risk, especially on platforms with weak or no branch prediction.
>>
>> Since optional fields makes little sense in a world without hotspot express,
>> I think these should simply be made non-optional.
>>
>> Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~redestad/8172169/webrev.01
>> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8172169
>
> This looks good to me! As Vladimir mentioned, we missed to remove this during Compact Strings development.

Thanks!

I guess I will need a second opinion on the test results and selection,
though: there are some new failures which all look like pre-existing or
environment issues to me. See link in bug.

/Claes

>
> Best regards,
> Tobias
>
>>
>> Testing: JPRT pass.
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> /Claes