RFR: 8340620: Fix -Wzero-as-null-pointer-constant warnings for CompressedOops

[Stefan Karlsson]

On Tue, 24 Sep 2024 23:26:08 GMT, Kim Barrett <kbarrett at openjdk.org> wrote:

> Please review this change that fixes -Wzero-as-null-pointer-constant warnings
> in CompressedOops code.  These all relate to CompressedOops::base().
> 
> I also added a couple of asserts to verify our assumptions about null pointer
> constants being representationally zero. That isn't a Standard-conforming
> assumption, but holds for all platforms we currently support. I considered,
> and even explored, a couple of different options.
> 
> (1) Continue to have CompressedOops::base() be a pointer, but avoid that
> assumption, being more careful about how zero-valued pointers are treated. But
> that adds significant complexity that we can't test, since we don't support
> any platforms needing that extra work.
> 
> (2) Change CompressedOops::base() to an integral adjustment.  This is probably
> the correct approach, but is much more intrusive and wide ranging in the
> changes required.  Maybe something for the future.
> 
> Testing: mach5 tier1-5
> GHA testing, verifying builds on some platforms not supported by Oracle.
> 
> There are some simple changes to s390 and ppc code that I haven't tested,
> beyond verifying compilation.

Looks good. One inquiry below.

src/hotspot/share/oops/compressedOops.inline.hpp line 53:

> 51:   // Assume a null base casts to zero.  Otherwise we need more complexity that
> 52:   // we can't test, since this is true for all currently supported platforms.
> 53:   assert(0 == reinterpret_cast<uintptr_t>(nullptr), "null pointer value not zero?");

Could this be a static_assert?

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

Marked as reviewed by stefank (Reviewer).

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/21172#pullrequestreview-2327422676
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/21172#discussion_r1774716887