RFR: 8291555: Implement alternative fast-locking scheme [v75]

[Daniel D. Daugherty]

On Fri, 5 May 2023 14:48:35 GMT, Daniel D. Daugherty <dcubed at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Roman Kennke has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains 172 commits:
>> 
>>  - Merge branch 'master' into JDK-8291555-v2
>>  - Disable new lightweight locking in Zero
>>  - Relax zapped-entry test when calling thread is not owning thread
>>  - Address @dcubed-ojdk review comments
>>  - Address @dholmes-ora's review comments
>>  - Add missing new file
>>  - Fix copyright on new files
>>  - Address @coleenp's review
>>  - Merge commit '452cb8432f4d45c3dacd4415bc9499ae73f7a17c' into JDK-8291555-v2
>>  - Fix arm and ppcle builds
>>  - ... and 162 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/f143bf7c...a65b3aeb
>
> src/hotspot/cpu/aarch64/c1_LIRAssembler_aarch64.cpp line 2562:
> 
>> 2560:   Register lock = op->lock_opr()->as_register();
>> 2561:   if (LockingMode == LM_MONITOR) {
>> 2562:     if (op->info() != null) {
> 
> Hmmm... other places in the same file compare `op->info()` with `nullptr` and not `null`.

I have absolutely no idea why the above diff showed up when I went to view the
changes for the zero fix. It's not present in the zero fix webrev, but it was in the
"Review new changes" link... sigh... this GitHub thing mystifies me...

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/10907#discussion_r1186194465