RFR(S): JDK-8203481 Incorrect constraint for unextended_sp in frame:safe_for_sender

[Daniel D. Daugherty]

On 6/14/18 9:44 AM, Andrew Haley wrote:
> On 06/10/2018 10:05 PM, David Holmes wrote:
>> I have to admit I still can't connect all the pieces here. When we are
>> operating in frame::safe_for_sender, what has set _unextended_sp? Can
>> you walk through a complete example? I can't quite connect Andrew's
>> example to the original problem.
>>
>> It still seems to me that the current frame should have:
>>
>> sp <= unextended_sp <= stack_base()
> No.  We save SP, then remove unused stack, then call int a method.

Where does this "remove unused stack" come from? And is that only
an ARM thing? I don't remember seeing that on X64...


> The address saved into the current method is the old SP, before stack
> items were removed.  This is refereed to as the "unextended_sp" in th
> eshared code, but it's actually *below* the SP when a method was
> entered.

I can see how removing things from the stack (and incrementing SP) could
result in an SP value > saved SP value. It's the "removing things from
the stack" part that has me confused right now...

Also, we have a terminology problem in this thread. In this:

     sp <= unextended_sp <= stack_base()

I would say that 'sp' is below (or equal) to unextended_sp and that
'unextended_sp' is below (or equal) to stack_base(). To me "below"
is like "less than" and "above" is like "greater than".

Dan