[13] RFR(XXS) 8225369: [AOT] vm/classfmt/cpl/cplres001/cplres00101m004/cplres00101m004.html fails

[Vladimir Kozlov]

On 6/21/19 4:39 PM, Tom Rodriguez wrote:
> 
> 
> dean.long at oracle.com wrote on 6/21/19 2:59 PM:
>> On 6/21/19 1:35 PM, Tom Rodriguez wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> dean.long at oracle.com wrote on 6/21/19 1:14 PM:
>>>> If we only have one API, renaming resolvePossiblyCachedConstantInPool to resolveConstantInPool would make it more 
>>>> consistent with other resolve methods.  What do you think?
>>>
>>> I assume the naming is to provide a clue to the API use in ConstantPool.  It does seem like it's really only about 
>>> constants and not general constant pool resolution right?
>>>
>> Yes, it's about those types of constants that are Objects.  The resolution could involve calling into Java, but we 
>> should only do that once.  That's why the cache is important.  Going through the cache should be the default, and 
>> every other lookup and resolve method should be going through the cache, so the PossiblyCached part seems confusing 
>> and redundant now.
> 
> Is this something that's changed in 13+?  It would be nice to maintain JVMCI source consistency between 8 and 13 where 
> possible.  Anyway, I don't feel strongly either way about the name.  It's pure internals anyway.

Please, keep name the same for consistency with jvmci-8.

Vladimir

> 
> tom
> 
>>
>> dl
>>> tom
>>>
>>>>
>>>> dl
>>>>
>>>> On 6/21/19 1:09 PM, dean.long at oracle.com wrote:
>>>>> On 6/21/19 9:42 AM, Tom Rodriguez wrote:
>>>>>> Doesn't that make resolveConstantInPool completely unused?
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, except for a jtreg test, which can be removed.
>>>>>
>>>>>> It should probably be deleted and the javadoc updated for resolvePossiblyCachedConstantInPool.
>>>>>
>>>>> OK.
>>>>>
>>>>> dl
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> tom
>>>>>>
>>>>>> dean.long at oracle.com wrote on 6/18/19 10:52 AM:
>>>>>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8225369
>>>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dlong/8225369/webrev/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This test triggers a race, which can result in different resolved values of the MethodHandle constant.  The VM 
>>>>>>> chooses a winner and stores that value in the constant pool cache, however Graal is not checking the cache.  The 
>>>>>>> trivial fix is to use the proper API that goes through the cache.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> dl
>>>>>
>>>>
>>