RFR: 8368897: RISC-V: Cleanup RV_EXT_FEATURE_FLAGS & RV_NON_EXT_FEATURE_FLAGS [v4]

[Hamlin Li]

On Tue, 7 Oct 2025 09:21:00 GMT, Robbin Ehn <rehn at openjdk.org> wrote:

> But why is not vector size/length called: `VM_Version::non_ext::rvv_vlen()` or similar ? Should it ?

I think this should be in another pr.

> Should VM_Version::non_ext and VM_Version::ext be private, so we create a public: VM_Version::ziboz_block_size() ?

If you prefer `VM_Version::ziboz_block_size` as the interface, then I don't think it's necessary to have `VM_Version::non_ext` and `VM_Version::ext` in the implemention.

> I added: `static bool supports_fencei_barrier() { return ext_Zifencei.enabled(); }`
> Was this wrong? Should I have used `VM_Version::ext_Zifencei.enabled()` in MASM ?
> Can we agree to one consistent way?

As mentioned above, I think this should be in another pr: a consistent interface of VM_Version.

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/27562#discussion_r2410138667