RFR: 8213481: [REDO] Fix incorrect copy constructors in hotspot

[Kim Barrett]

> On Nov 19, 2018, at 5:54 PM, coleen.phillimore at oracle.com wrote:
> 
> Looks good to me.
> Coleen

Thanks!

> 
> On 11/19/18 1:14 AM, Kim Barrett wrote:
>> Please review this fix of the debug-only copy constructor and
>> assignment operator for ResourceObj, along with adding some missing
>> uses of the copy constructor.
>> 
>> The missing copy constructor uses were found by enabling -Wextra.
>> 
>> The ResourceObj debug-only copy constructor should behave exactly the
>> same as the corresponding default constructor.  That is, the setup for
>> checking the allocation state in the destructor and operator delete
>> should be the same whether in the normal or copy constructor.  That
>> previously wasn't true, resulting in assert failures.
>> 
>> The ResourceObj assignment operator also should not be assuming the
>> target of the assignment was stack/embeded allocated; that's just not
>> a valid assumption.  The corresponding assertion has been removed.
>> 
>> Note that the ResourceObj allocation/construction/deletion code is
>> oddly indented, using an initial 4 space indentation and 2 spaces for
>> further indenting, unlike the usual consistent 2 space indentation
>> used elsewhere in HotSpot, including elsewhere in allocation.cpp.
>> I've left that indentation intact to minimize diffs in some views for
>> review.  Unless there are objections, I plan to fix the indentation.
>> 
>> CR:
>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8213481
>> 
>> Webrev:
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~kbarrett/8213481/open.00/
>> 
>> Testing:
>> mach5 tier1-3.  There were many failures in these tiers with just the
>> addition of the missing copy constructor calls (JDK-8213414).