RFR: 8371259: ML-DSA AVX2 and AVX512 intrinsics and improvements [v3]

[Volodymyr Paprotski]

On Fri, 28 Nov 2025 08:23:27 GMT, Tobias Hartmann <thartmann at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Oh.. realized that I should had checked JBS.. thanks @ascarpino for resolving the bug I caused! At least its just the option.. whew.
>> 
>>> @dholmes-ora Hi David, need some help with this please, don't have access to an ARM system to reproduce (or the ARM expertise).. could you point me at the failing job if thats available? Or some log if not?
>>> 
>>> * Is it an issue with the options (i.e. `-XX:UseAVX=2` perhaps). I probably should had added `-XX:+IgnoreUnrecognizedVMOptions` to it..
>>> * Otherwise, I am stumped.. the test case isn't architecture-specific.. it calls two methods (one of which is annotated as an intrinsic..) and expects them to return the same value.. i.e. Java and Intrinsic version should behave the same..
>>> * Only thing I can think of.. The ARM implementation took some shortcuts in name of optimization. This can be entirely valid if the code calling the intrinsics never should get some specific value (-ranges). i.e. the tests RNG be further restricted..
>>> * Otherwise.. is it possible its a bug in the ARM intrinsic?
>
> This caused a regression: [JDK-8372703](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8372703). @vpaprotsk Could you please have a look? Thanks.

@TobiHartmann looking! 
- Havent been able to reproduce yet (and folks with machine access I need are away today, US holiday) 
- From the first glance, the error is about code size (and this intrinsic is indeed large..). But that shouldnt be platform-dependent, iirc.. except I see `enum platform_dependent_constants` is no longer just a simple static sum of ints.. hmm.

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

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/28136#issuecomment-3589866931