[ping] RE: RFR(S): 8179618: Fixes for range of OptoLoopAlignment and Inlining flags

[Lindenmaier, Goetz]

Hi Tobias,

that was quick, thanks!

Best regards,
  Goetz.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tobias Hartmann [mailto:tobias.hartmann at oracle.com]
> Sent: Dienstag, 23. Mai 2017 08:42
> To: Lindenmaier, Goetz <goetz.lindenmaier at sap.com>; hotspot-compiler-
> dev at openjdk.java.net
> Subject: Re: [ping] RE: RFR(S): 8179618: Fixes for range of OptoLoopAlignment
> and Inlining flags
> 
> Hi Goetz,
> 
> On 23.05.2017 08:29, Lindenmaier, Goetz wrote:
> > could someone please sponsor this change?
> > Final webrev:
> > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~goetz/wr17/8179618-FlagRanges/webrev.03/
> 
> Sure, I'll sponsor it!
> 
> Best regards,
> Tobias
> 
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: hotspot-compiler-dev [mailto:hotspot-compiler-dev-
> >> bounces at openjdk.java.net] On Behalf Of Lindenmaier, Goetz
> >> Sent: Dienstag, 16. Mai 2017 12:08
> >> Cc: hotspot-compiler-dev at openjdk.java.net
> >> Subject: RE: RFR(S): 8179618: Fixes for range of OptoLoopAlignment and
> Inlining
> >> flags
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> could someone please sponsor this change?
> >> Final webrev:
> >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~goetz/wr17/8179618-FlagRanges/webrev.03/
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >>   Goetz
> >>
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>> From: Lindenmaier, Goetz
> >>> Sent: Freitag, 12. Mai 2017 09:10
> >>> To: 'Thomas Stüfe' <thomas.stuefe at gmail.com>
> >>> Cc: hotspot-compiler-dev at openjdk.java.net
> >>> Subject: RE: RFR(S): 8179618: Fixes for range of OptoLoopAlignment and
> >> Inlining
> >>> flags
> >>>
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> could someone please sponsor? Thanks!
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> I fixed the print statement.  New webrev anyways:
> >>>
> >>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~goetz/wr17/8179618-FlagRanges/webrev.03/
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Best regards,
> >>>
> >>>   Goetz.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> From: Thomas Stüfe [mailto:thomas.stuefe at gmail.com]
> >>> Sent: Tuesday, May 09, 2017 7:54 PM
> >>> To: Lindenmaier, Goetz <goetz.lindenmaier at sap.com>
> >>> Cc: hotspot-compiler-dev at openjdk.java.net
> >>> Subject: Re: RFR(S): 8179618: Fixes for range of OptoLoopAlignment and
> >> Inlining
> >>> flags
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Hi Goetz,
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 4:17 PM, Lindenmaier, Goetz
> >>> <goetz.lindenmaier at sap.com <mailto:goetz.lindenmaier at sap.com> >
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> 	Hi Thomas,
> >>>
> >>> 	thanks for looking at my change.
> >>> 	New webrev:
> >>> 	http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~goetz/wr17/8179618-
> >>> FlagRanges/webrev.02/
> >>>
> >>> 	> c2_globals.hpp:
> >>> 	> -          range(0, max_intx)                                                \
> >>> 	> +          range(0, ((intx)MIN2((int64_t)max_intx,(int64_t)(+1.0e10))))      \
> >>> 	> 32bit: I would have expected a build warning for the cast. Is it okay
> >>> that we can never reach the max value on 32bit?
> >>>
> >>> 	I double checked that there is no warning in our night builds and on
> >>> linuxintel.
> >>>
> >>> 	> commandLineFlagConstraintsCompiler.cpp:
> >>> 	>      CommandLineError::print(verbose,
> >>> 	>                              "OptoLoopAlignment (" INTX_FORMAT ") must be "
> >>> 	>                              "multiple of NOP size\n");
> >>> 	> There is an error here, the print parameter is missing. Would have
> >>> expected the compiler to complain, actually - at least the gcc. Again,
> curious.
> >>>
> >>> 	Thanks, good catch! The error was there before, but fixed anyways. I
> >>> also
> >>> 	added the NOP size.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> +  // Relevant on ppc, s390, sparc. Will be optimized where
> >>> +  // addr_unit() == 1.
> >>>    if (OptoLoopAlignment % relocInfo::addr_unit() != 0) {
> >>>      CommandLineError::print(verbose,
> >>>                              "OptoLoopAlignment (" INTX_FORMAT ") must be "
> >>> -                            "multiple of NOP size\n");
> >>> +                            "multiple of NOP size (" INTX_FORMAT ")\n",
> >>> +                            value, relocInfo::addr_unit());
> >>>
> >>> We are getting there...
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> addr_unit() returns int, so use %d, not INTX_FORMAT.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Apart from that all is fine. No need for a new webrev.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> ..Thomas
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> 	Best regards,
> >>> 	  Goetz.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> 	Kind Regards, Thomas
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> 	On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 12:57 PM, Lindenmaier, Goetz
> >>> <mailto:goetz.lindenmaier at sap.com <mailto:goetz.lindenmaier at sap.com>
> >
> >>> wrote:
> >>> 	Hi,
> >>>
> >>> 	This change fixes range handling of a few flags of C2.
> >>> 	This should go to jdk10, and later be downported to some
> >>> 	update of jdk9.
> >>>
> >>> 	Please review this change. I please need a sponsor.
> >>> 	http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~goetz/wr17/8179618-
> >>> FlagRanges/webrev.01/
> >>>
> >>> 	Class WarmCallInfo limits its values to 1.0e10, but the flags used
> >>> 	to set it's fields (HotCallCountThreshold etc.) are limited by max_intx.
> >>> 	Using values over 1.0e10 causes assertions in the debug build.
> >>>
> >>> 	OptoLoopAlignment must be a multiple of nop size, else it's not
> >>> 	possible to generate the instructions that go into the pad.
> >>> 	On x86 NOP size is 1, so it's no problem.
> >>> 	For SPARC, OptoLoopAlignmentConstraintFunc implements a special
> >>> 	case for bigger NOPs. This is also needed for s390 and ppc.
> >>> 	I just removed the #define, as the code works also on platforms
> >>> 	where NOPsize == 1. Actually, it should be optimized by the C
> >>> 	compiler in these cases.
> >>>
> >>> 	Best regards,
> >>> 	  Goetz.
> >>>
> >>>
> >