RFR(S) 8248445: Use of AbsI/AbsL nodes should be limited to supported platforms

[Boris Ulasevich]

Hi Vladimir,

Ok. Thank you for review!

regards,
Boris

On 04.08.2020 20:55, Vladimir Kozlov wrote:
> Hi Boris,
>
> Good change.
>
> Add year to test's copyright line.
>
> Regards,
> Vladimir K
>
> On 8/4/20 9:58 AM, Boris Ulasevich wrote:
>> Hi Vladimir,
>>
>> Yes, thank you. I've re-written this to improve readability by 
>> changing the logic slightly.
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~bulasevich/8248445/webrev.03
>>
>> thanks,
>> Boris
>>
>> On 03.08.2020 20:25, Vladimir Kozlov wrote:
>>> Hi Boris,
>>>
>>> The current code is hard to read. Can you rearrange it to have clear 
>>> code flow (and correct spaces for if ())? Including F and D checks. 
>>> To something like:
>>>
>>>   if (tzero == TypeF::ZERO) {
>>>     if (sub->Opcode() == Op_SubF &&
>>>         sub->in(2) == x &&
>>>         phase->type(sub->in(1)) == tzero)) {
>>>       x = new AbsFNode(x);
>>>       if (flip) {
>>>         x = new SubFNode(sub->in(1), phase->transform(x));
>>>       }
>>>     }
>>>   } else if
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Vladimir
>>>
>>> On 8/2/20 1:54 PM, Boris Ulasevich wrote:
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> Please review a simple change to C2 to fix a regression: AbsI/AbsL
>>>> nodes are used without checking that the platform supports them
>>>> (for now it is the issue for ARM32 and 32-bit x86 platforms).
>>>>
>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~bulasevich/8248445/webrev.02
>>>> http://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8248445
>>>>
>>>> thanks,
>>>> Boris
>>>>
>>