RFR: 8343767: Enumerate StubGen blobs, stubs and entries and generate code from declarations [v5]

[Andrew Dinn]

On Fri, 22 Nov 2024 04:07:25 GMT, Vladimir Ivanov <vlivanov at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Andrew Dinn has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge or a rebase. The incremental webrev excludes the unrelated changes brought in by the merge/rebase. The pull request contains 55 additional commits since the last revision:
>> 
>>  - Merge branch 'master' into iterate_stubs
>>  - fix element sizes in s390 copy routines
>>  - fix stub is and align flags for s390
>>  - fix comments and remove unused stubid on riscv
>>  - locate super lookup stubs in same blob for all arches
>>  - do verification under ifdef ASSERT
>>  - fix yet more problems with s390 stubs
>>  - better error notification
>>  - fix more problems with s390 stubs
>>  - Verify stubs are generated in correct blob
>>  - ... and 45 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/38c74dcc...e21268c4
>
> I submitted it for testing and it seems the build is mostly broken on x86 when `UseAVX=3` is set. I even tried to manually build the patch on an AVX512-capable host and it reliably fails early during startup:
> 
> Error occurred during initialization of boot layer
> java.lang.module.FindException: Error reading module: /scratch/vlivanov/jdk/build/linux-x64-fastdebug/jdk/modules/java.base
> Caused by: java.lang.module.InvalidModuleDescriptorException: Bad constant pool entry: 90

@iwanowww Thanks for testing Vladimir. This is crashing during module loading so it may be an error in the configuration of generation for the AVX variants of the arraycopy routines. s390 crashed at the same place for that reason because its jmod files had been built incorrectly.

I'll see if I can find a problem by eyeballing the x86 source changes related to AVX and let you know if there is something obvious. If not then I will probably need to obtain an AVX capable machine and debug the 'jdk' binary.

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

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/21957#issuecomment-2500131919