RFR: 8259822: [PPC64] Support the prefixed instruction format added in POWER10 [v2]

[Corey Ashford]

On Tue, 26 Jan 2021 19:18:18 GMT, Kazunori Ogata <ogatak at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> src/hotspot/cpu/ppc/assembler_ppc.hpp line 1543:
>> 
>>> 1541:      }
>>> 1542:   }
>>> 1543:   static bool is_pli(const int* p)   { return is_paddi(p, true); }
>> 
>> is_pli() is defined, but not used, as far as I can tell.
>
> It is just intended to show a usage of the second argument of is_paddi(const int* p, bool is_pli = false).  Is it unnecessary, i.e., self-evident?

In past open source projects I have worked on, functions that essentially are unreachable in the final product cannot be tested, so there's no way to know if they work as intended. For that reason, only code that is used and/or can be tested in the final product (e.g. via an externally-visible API) would be accepted in a commit.

I don't know if the OpenJDK project follows that rule or not.

-------------

PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/2095