Request for review:8013067:Zero builds are broken after 8010862

[Coleen Phillimore]

On 05/06/2013 06:04 PM, Jiangli Zhou wrote:
> Hi Vladimir, Coleen and Christian,
>
> Here is the updated webrev: 
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jiangli/8013067/webrev.01/. I left the 
> GET_METHOD_COUNTERS macro unchanged due to usage of goto in CALL_VM. I 
> think that's what Coleen tried to point out in her email.

Yes, this looks better.
Coleen

>
> Thanks,
> Jiangli
>
> On 05/06/2013 11:03 AM, Vladimir Kozlov wrote:
>> On 5/6/13 10:40 AM, Jiangli Zhou wrote:
>>> Hi Vladimir,
>>>
>>> I was considering whether to switch to functions, but decided not to
>>
>> Functions could be not inlined (in debug VM, for example) so you will 
>> get performance regression. That is why we use macros sometimes but 
>> it is not the case in this code.
>>
>>> alter the existing code too much. Thanks a lot for the review and
>>> feedback. I will replace the macros.
>>
>> Thanks, in this code there is no big win from using macro:
>>
>> INCR_INVOCATION_COUNT(mcs)
>>
>> instead of:
>>
>> mcs->invocation_counter()->increment();
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Vladimir
>>
>>>
>>> Jiangli
>>>
>>> On 05/06/2013 10:13 AM, Vladimir Kozlov wrote:
>>>> Jiangli,
>>>>
>>>> I understand that you followed existing code pattern using macros. But
>>>> it is very difficult to debug, especially nested macros.
>>>> I don't think we need separate macros just for 1 or 2 uses.
>>>>
>>>> I would like to see all these macros gone (GET_METHOD_COUNTERS,
>>>> *_COUNT(mcs), INCR_*_COUNT(mcs)).
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Vladimir
>>>>
>>>> On 5/6/13 9:19 AM, Jiangli Zhou wrote:
>>>>> Christian has reviewed the change. Could I have one more review?
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Jiangli
>>>>>
>>>>> On 04/30/2013 04:31 PM, Jiangli Zhou wrote:
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Please review the following change for 8013067:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>   http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jiangli/8013067/webrev.00/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Jiangli
>>>>>
>>>
>