RFR: 8333393: PhaseCFG::insert_anti_dependences can fail to raise LCAs and to add necessary anti-dependence edges [v4]

[Daniel Lundén]

On Fri, 28 Feb 2025 10:40:55 GMT, Christian Hagedorn <chagedorn at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't this pattern lead to higher memory consumption because we need to keep already visited nodes in the worklist? It probably doesn't matter much in practice, but I find the current approach more hygienic.
>
> That's true that we have more memory consumption. But it's probably neglectable. However, we seem to use both approaches throughout our code base, so I don't have a strong opinion about what which version we use here.

OK, I'll leave it as is then for this changeset. Perhaps we should have a broader discussion at some point to make this consistent across a larger part of the code base.

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/23691#discussion_r1975386068