RFR(XS): 8250233: -XX:+CITime triggers guarantee(events != NULL) in jvmci.cpp

[Tom Rodriguez]

Vladimir Kozlov wrote on 7/27/20 1:47 PM:
> We simply missing EnableJVMCI flag check! That is why JVMCI is not 
> initialized. EnableJVMCI should be true in hosted mode.

Yes that makes sense.

tom

> 
> I looked and I see few problematic places in compileBroker.cpp  
> statistic code guarded by #if INCLUDE_JVMCI but which does not check 
> EnableJVMCI or comp->is_jvmci(). I think it should be fixed.
> 
> Also I think JVMCI_event_1 is useless now in print_compilation_timers() 
> because its output does not go into tty.
> 
> Thanks,
> Vladimir
> 
> On 7/27/20 12:51 PM, Tom Rodriguez wrote:
>> Doug is away, but it seems like we could just remove the JVMCI_event_1 
>> call in print_compilation_timers.  It's not a particularly worthwhile 
>> notification and all the other events should be able to safely assume 
>> that JVMCI has actually been initialized which I think was probably 
>> the point of the guarantee.  If that's not sufficient then we need to 
>> convert that guarantee in a check for NULL and return.
>>
>> tom
>>
>> Vladimir Kozlov wrote on 7/27/20 12:35 PM:
>>> Nope, the check is correct. In hosted mode Graal is used as Java 
>>> application and not as JIT compiler so that UseJVMCICompiler flag is 
>>> false.
>>>
>>> The problem is really caused by recent 8248321 changes - it is 
>>> regression. Doug, please advice how to fix it.
>>> I think the new JVMCI events code should be adjusted for hosted mode.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Vladimir
>>>
>>> On 7/24/20 5:53 AM, Schmidt, Lutz wrote:
>>>> Resending after updating subject line with bug id.
>>>> Sorry for the spam.
>>>> Lutz
>>>>
>>>> On 24.07.20, 14:51, "Schmidt, Lutz" <lutz.schmidt at sap.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>      Dear all,
>>>>
>>>>      may I please request reviews for this small fix? I would even 
>>>> say it is a trivial fix. It inverts an if condition such that JVMCI 
>>>> specific code is called only when JVMCI compilation is enabled via 
>>>> UseJVMCICompiler.
>>>>
>>>>      Bug:    https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8250233
>>>>      Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~lucy/webrevs/8250233.00/
>>>>
>>>>      Local testing looks good. jdk/submit tests pending.
>>>>
>>>>      Thank you!
>>>>      Lutz
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>