[ping] RFR(M): 8160245: C1: Clean up platform #defines in c1_LIR.hpp.

[Lindenmaier, Goetz]

Hi Coleen,

You're right, I only need two args.  That's wrong because I edited
it before 8159335 was merged to hs-comp which removed an 
argument.  I'll fix that.

For the overloaded functions, do you want me to add
an implementation with ShouldNotReachHere() for the 
unused versions?  And isn't that basically the same as having
unused parameters?

Best regards,
  Goetz.



> -----Original Message-----
> From: hotspot-runtime-dev [mailto:hotspot-runtime-dev-
> bounces at openjdk.java.net] On Behalf Of Coleen Phillimore
> Sent: Wednesday, July 06, 2016 1:24 AM
> To: hotspot-runtime-dev at openjdk.java.net
> Subject: Re: [ping] RFR(M): 8160245: C1: Clean up platform #defines in
> c1_LIR.hpp.
> 
> 
> Why is there a third register parameter to
> generate_stack_overflow_check() that is unused on all the platforms?
> 
> I would almost rather have one version with no arguments overloaded with
> one with two, than three default parameters.  It seems dangerous.
> 
> thanks,
> Coleen
> 
> On 7/5/16 6:47 PM, Vladimir Kozlov wrote:
> > CC to runtime too since it has changes in Interpreter and affects our
> > closed code.
> >
> > Hi Goetz,
> >
> > Please, set "Fix Version".
> >
> > And if it is JDK 9 you need FC Extension Request since you converted
> > it to Enhancement:
> >
> > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk9-dev/2016-June/004443.html
> >
> > Someone from Oracle have to sponsor it and do related closed code
> > changes and testing.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Vladimir
> >
> > On 7/5/16 3:47 AM, Lindenmaier, Goetz wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> could someone please have a look at this issue? I recap the description
> >> below, and I also updated the webrev which would no more apply to
> >> hs-comp:
> >>
> >> c1_LIR.hpp defines a row of functions guarded by platform
> >> defines. This is bad style and hinders new platform ports.
> >> (I'm working on S390 aka Z :))
> >>
> >> This change removes the majority of these defines. It introduces
> >> common headers, and moves implementations to c1_LIR_<cpu>.cpp files.
> >>
> >> It guards single_softfp() and double_softfp() by __SOFTFP__.
> >> This is not used in any openJdk platform. I can not test this
> >> on the closed platforms ARM32 and PPC32.
> >>
> >> It removes the guard around the LIR_Address constructor. There
> >> is no point in guarding this code, verify() assures by
> >> assertions that it can not be misused. I also introduce a new
> >> constructor that leaves out the scale argument and introduce
> >> some usages on X86.
> >>
> >> This change also moves verify() to the new platform files. In the
> >> header, LIR_ADDRESS_PD_VERIFY was used to guard usage
> >> of pd_verify(). Neither of these are used in openJdk. If this define
> >> is used in the closed ports pd_verify() must be renamed to verify().
> >>
> >> The code that was previously guarded by ARM, ARM32 or PPC32 is
> >> moved to a properly guarded section in c1_LIR.cpp. Actually,
> >> it should be moved to according new files c1_LIR_<cpu>.cpp in
> >> the closed ports. But this way the change should basically
> >> work for the closed ports.
> >>
> >> I added fnoreg on x86 to note down the code similarly on all
> >> platforms.
> >>
> >> I cleaned up a flag with a limited range on PPC_32.
> >>
> >> generate_stack_overflow_check() in templateInterpreterGenerator.hpp
> >> is defined with different parameters for the platforms. I added default
> >> parameters noreg so that the signature is the same for all platforms.
> >>
> >> Please review this change. I please need a sponsor.
> >> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8160245
> >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~goetz/wr16/8160245-simplifyC1/webrev.02/
> >>
> >> I built and tested this on linuxx86_64, solaris_sparc and
> >> the ppc platforms.
> >>
> >> Best regards,
> >>   Goetz.
> >>
> >>