RFR(t) 8217424 Remove the idempotent parameter to Method::sort_methods

[Ioi Lam]

Hi Coleen, thanks for the archeological report. I can't really 
understand what this comment means, either.

Also thanks to Aleksey for the review. I'll push the changeset now.

BTW, I wonder why we don't do a complete ordering using the method name 
+ signature. That way we can do a simple binary search, and there's no 
need for the up and down walking in InstanceKlass::find_method_index.

Thanks

- Ioi

On 1/22/19 5:33 AM, coleen.phillimore at oracle.com wrote:
>
> I checked out of curiousity, this is what it used to do:
>
>   // Prevent qsort from reordering a previous valid sort by
>   // considering the address of the methodOops if two methods
>   // would otherwise compare as equal.  Required to preserve
>   // optimal access order in the shared archive.  Slower than
>   // method_compare, only used for shared archive creation.
>   static int method_compare_idempotent(methodOop* a, methodOop* b) {
>     int i = method_compare(a, b);
>     if (i != 0) return i;
>     return ( a < b ? -1 : (a == b ? 0 : 1));
>   }
>
> So if the Method name was the same it would preserve the order in the 
> CDS archive.  Not sure why that would have been optimial.
> Looks good!
> Coleen
>
> On 1/22/19 12:30 AM, Ioi Lam wrote:
>> Please review this trivial change.
>>
>> The "idempotent" parameter to Method::sort_methods() is always false, 
>> so let's just remove it.
>>
>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8217424
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iklam/jdk13/8217424-sort-methods-idempotent-param.v01/ 
>>
>>
>> Thanks
>> - Ioi
>