RFR: 8199220: Zero build broken after 8195103 and 8191102 (was RFR: 8199220: Zero build broken)

[Thomas Stüfe]

Reminds me of :
http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-dev/2017-November/029289.html

Could this be the same issue?

On Mon 12. Mar 2018 at 21:49, Edward Nevill <edward.nevill at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mon, 2018-03-12 at 19:54 +0000, Thomas Stüfe wrote:
> > Hi Edward,
> >
> > Thanks a lot for the fixing work!
> >
> > However, I am not so sure about the change to debug.hpp. Is the point of
> the Static assert thing not The missing <false> Specialization? In which
> case the compile error you saw there was a static assert firing...
> > I may be wrong, maybe Erik could clarify?
> >
> > Otherwise the change looks good. Thank you.
> >
>
> Yes, of course, I see the purpose of the STATIC_ASSERT now. Kind of
> obvious from the name.
>
> The failure is in
>
>   template <DecoratorSet decorators, typename T>
>   static void verify_types(){
>     // If this fails to compile, then you have sent in something that is
>     // not recognized as a valid primitive type to a primitive Access
> function.
>     STATIC_ASSERT((HasDecorator<decorators, INTERNAL_VALUE_IS_OOP>::value
> || // oops have already been validated
>                    (IsPointer<T>::value || IsIntegral<T>::value) ||
>                     IsFloatingPoint<T>::value)); // not allowed primitive
> type
>   }
>
> and the error is
>
> /home/ed/openjdk/hs/src/hotspot/share/oops/access.inline.hpp: In
> instantiation of ‘void AccessInternal::verify_types() [with long unsigned
> int decorators = 4096; T = volatile oop]’:
>
> I will continue too look at this but would appreciate some help.


Vague sense of deja vu:

http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-dev/2017-November/029289.html

Could this be the same issue?

>
>
> Thanks,
> Ed.
>
>