RFR 8242263: Diagnose synchronization on primitive wrappers
David Holmes
david.holmes at oracle.com
Mon Aug 10 04:12:15 UTC 2020
Hi Patricio,
First, I confirmed with Valhalla folk that this change is fine to go
ahead as a stand-alone change independent of the proposed JEP in this area.
I've checked the incremental changes for v2, v3 and v4 and everything
seems good to me.
I only have a couple of nits with the tests:
54 private static void initTestObjects() {
55 testObjects.add(Character.valueOf('H'));
56 testObjects.add(Boolean.valueOf(true));
57 Byte byteT = 0x40;
58 testObjects.add(byteT);
59 Short shortT = 0x4000;
60 testObjects.add(shortT);
61 testObjects.add(Integer.valueOf(0x40000000));
62 testObjects.add(Long.valueOf(0x4000000000000000L));
63 testObjects.add(Float.valueOf(1.20f));
64 testObjects.add(Double.valueOf(1.2345));
65 }
Why are Byte and Short treated differently?
74 fatalTests[index] =
Stream.of(commonFatalTestsFlags, specificFlags[i], new String[]
{"SyncOnPrimitiveWrapperTest$FatalTest", Integer.toString(j)})
75
.flatMap(Stream::of).toArray(String[]::new);
The preferred Java style [1] for stream operations is:
fatalTests[index] = Stream.of(commonFatalTestsFlags, specificFlags[i],
new String[] {"SyncOnPrimitiveWrapperTest$FatalTest", Integer.toString(j)})
.flatMap(Stream::of)
.toArray(String[]::new);
Thanks,
David
-----
[1] As demonstrated here (but widely used in JDK code):
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~alundblad/styleguide/index-v6.html#toc-wrapping-lines
On 7/08/2020 4:48 am, Patricio Chilano wrote:
> Hi Dan,
>
> On 8/5/20 6:47 PM, Daniel D. Daugherty wrote:
>> I'm peeking ahead to the next webrev... :-)
>>
>> > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~pchilanomate/8242263/v3/webrev/
> : )
>
>> General comments:
>> - check files for copyright year updates.
> Updated accessFlags.hpp, c1_MacroAssembler_aarch64.cpp,
> c1_MacroAssembler_arm.cpp and c1_MacroAssembler_x86.cpp.
>
>> src/hotspot/share/runtime/synchronizer.hpp
>> No comments.
>>
>> src/hotspot/share/runtime/synchronizer.cpp
>> L507: const markWord mark = obj->mark();
>> L508:
>> L509: if (DiagnoseSyncOnPrimitiveWrappers != 0 &&
>> obj->klass()->is_box()) {
>> L510: return false;
>> L511: }
>> The new bailout on L509-511 can move above L507.
> Moved.
>
>> L573: fatal("Synchronizing on object " INTPTR_FORMAT " of klass
>> %s", p2i(obj()), obj->klass()->external_name());
>> This external_name() call does not have a ResourceMark.
> Good catch! I had one in a previous version but then I changed the
> conditionals and lost it for the fatal error case. The test worked okay
> because for the main JavaThread there is a ResourceMark in
> jni_invoke_static() (jni.cpp).
>
>> src/hotspot/share/logging/logTag.hpp
>> No comments.
>>
>> src/hotspot/share/oops/klass.hpp
>> No comments.
>>
>> src/hotspot/share/utilities/accessFlags.hpp
>> No comments.
>>
>> src/hotspot/share/runtime/globals.hpp
>> L814: "0: off "
>> Missing a ';' after "off".
> Fixed.
>
>> L816: "2: log message to stdout.
>> Perhaps add "(by default)" after "stdout" or
>> don't say where log output is at all.
>>
>> src/hotspot/share/runtime/arguments.cpp
>> L4197: LogConfiguration::configure_stdout(LogLevel::Info, true,
>> LOG_TAGS(primitivewrappers));
>> Hmmm... maybe ignore my comments about L816 in globals.hpp
>> since it looks like logging output is configured to 'stdout'.
>> I'm assuming that other log options to put output elsewhere
>> are overridden by this code?
> Right. So the logging is done under UL with the tag primitivewrappers.
> If that tag is specified in Xlog then this conditional will be skipped
> because !log_is_enabled(Info, primitivewrappers) will be false.
>
>> src/hotspot/share/classfile/systemDictionary.cpp
>> L2188: for (int i = T_BOOLEAN; i < T_LONG+1; i++) {
>> nit - s/T_LONG+1/T_LONG + 1/
> Fixed.
>
>> L2191: _box_klasses[i]->set_prototype_header(markWord::prototype());
>> I assume we're keeping the prototype_header field when Biased
>> Locking
>> goes away? The reason I ask:
>>
>> static markWord prototype() {
>> return markWord( no_hash_in_place | no_lock_in_place );
>> }
>>
>> is because without Biased Locking, do we really need the
>> prototype
>> anymore? The initial markWord won't need possible variants...
> Yes, I think it can go away unless somebody finds another use for it.
> Maybe Valhalla.
>
>> src/hotspot/share/jfr/metadata/metadata.xml
>> L69: <Event name="SyncOnPrimitiveWrapper" category="Java
>> Application"
>> Is the category "Java Application" because it's the application
>> code that did something "wrong" here? Where "application" is
>> loosely
>> defined to include the possibility of auto generated code,
>> library
>> code and the like? Or perhaps "application" because something
>> "above"
>> the "Java Virtual Machine, Runtime" did the "wrong" thing here?
> I don't know what the right category should be really. I saw the events
> JavaMonitorEnter, JavaMonitorWait and JavaMonitorInflate and thought
> this event should fall in the same category they do.
>
>> src/jdk.jfr/share/conf/jfr/default.jfc
>> No comments.
>>
>> src/jdk.jfr/share/conf/jfr/profile.jfc
>> No comments.
>>
>> test/lib/jdk/test/lib/jfr/EventNames.java
>> No comments.
>>
>> src/hotspot/cpu/aarch64/aarch64.ad
>> L3517: __ tbnz(tmp, exact_log2(JVM_ACC_IS_BOX_CLASS), cont);
>> <snip>
>> L3578: __ bind(cont);
>> L3579: // flag == EQ indicates success
>> L3580: // flag == NE indicates failure
>> If tbnz() branches to "cont" when we have a box class, what's
>> the flag value set to (EQ or NE)? And what set that flag value?
>> The reason I ask is I don't think tbnz() sets condition codes...
> Right, it doesn't set condition codes, so I kept the version I had (more
> on that below).
>
>> src/hotspot/cpu/aarch64/c1_MacroAssembler_aarch64.cpp
>> No comments.
>>
>> src/hotspot/cpu/aarch64/interp_masm_aarch64.cpp
>> No comments.
>>
>> src/hotspot/cpu/aarch64/macroAssembler_aarch64.cpp
>> int MacroAssembler::biased_locking_enter(Register lock_reg,
>> Register obj_reg,
>> Register swap_reg,
>> Register tmp_reg,
>> bool swap_reg_contains_mark,
>> Label& done,
>> Label* slow_case,
>> BiasedLockingCounters* counters) {
>> I think you've changed the only callers of biased_locking_enter()
>> that cared about the return value with this changeset so it can
>> be changed to a void function.
> Ok, this is what I mentioned to David in a previous email. Done.
>
>> src/hotspot/cpu/arm/c1_MacroAssembler_arm.cpp
>> No comments.
>>
>> src/hotspot/cpu/arm/c2_MacroAssembler_arm.cpp
>> L96: tbnz(Rscratch, exact_log2(JVM_ACC_IS_BOX_CLASS), done);
>> <snip>
>> L131: bind(done);
>> L132:
>> L133: // At this point flags are set as follows:
>> L134: // EQ -> Success
>> L135: // NE -> Failure, branch to slow path
>> If tbnz() branches to "done" when we have a box class, what's
>> the flag value set to (EQ or NE)? And what set that flag value?
>> The reason I ask is I don't think tbnz() sets condition codes...
> Right. Same as above, I kept the version I had.
>
>> src/hotspot/cpu/arm/interp_masm_arm.cpp
>> No comments.
>>
>> src/hotspot/cpu/arm/macroAssembler_arm.cpp
>> int MacroAssembler::biased_locking_enter(Register obj_reg,
>> Register swap_reg, Register tmp_reg,
>> bool swap_reg_contains_mark,
>> Register tmp2,
>> Label& done, Label&
>> slow_case,
>> BiasedLockingCounters* counters) {
>> I think you've changed the only callers of biased_locking_enter()
>> that cared about the return value with this changeset so it can
>> be changed to a void function.
> Done.
>
>> src/hotspot/cpu/ppc/c1_MacroAssembler_ppc.cpp
>> src/hotspot/cpu/ppc/interp_masm_ppc_64.cpp
>> src/hotspot/cpu/ppc/macroAssembler_ppc.cpp
>> No comments on the PPC code.
>>
>> src/hotspot/cpu/s390/c1_MacroAssembler_s390.cpp
>> src/hotspot/cpu/s390/interp_masm_s390.cpp
>> src/hotspot/cpu/s390/macroAssembler_s390.cpp
>> No comments on the S390 code.
>>
>> src/hotspot/cpu/x86/c1_MacroAssembler_x86.cpp
>> L58: load_klass(hdr, obj, rklass_decode_tmp);
>> What will this do with a 'noreg' value? (I need a refresher.)
> When not in 64 bit mode that register just won't be used.
>
>> src/hotspot/cpu/x86/c2_MacroAssembler_x86.cpp
>> No comments.
>>
>> src/hotspot/cpu/x86/interp_masm_x86.cpp
>> No comments.
>>
>> src/hotspot/cpu/x86/macroAssembler_x86.cpp
>> int MacroAssembler::biased_locking_enter(Register lock_reg,
>> Register obj_reg,
>> Register swap_reg,
>> Register tmp_reg,
>> Register tmp_reg2,
>> bool swap_reg_contains_mark,
>> Label& done,
>> Label* slow_case,
>> BiasedLockingCounters* counters) {
>> I think you've changed the only caller of biased_locking_enter()
>> that cared about the return value with this changeset so it can
>> be changed to a void function.
> Done.
>
>> test/hotspot/jtreg/runtime/Monitor/SyncOnPrimitiveWrapperTest.java
>> L30: * @test SyncOnPrimitiveWrapperTest
>> No parameter to @test directive.
> Removed.
>
>> L136: private static long sharedCounter = 0L;
>> Since you don't do anything with sharedCounter other than
>> increment it,
>> can the compilers optimize it away? If it can be optimized
>> away, does
>> that mean that:
>>
>> L142: synchronized (obj) {
>>
>> can also be optimized away?
>>
>> I don't think that:
>>
>> L161: synchronized (sharedLock1) {
>>
>> can be optimized away because it is shared by multiple threads.
>>
>> test/jdk/jdk/jfr/event/runtime/TestSyncOnPrimitiveWrapperEvent.java
>> Similar questions about 'counter' being optimized away.
>> Similar question about "synchronized (obj) {" being optimized away.
> I'm not sure if the compiler will optimize it away. Seems unlikely given
> the counter we are incrementing is not just local to some thread.
>
>
> Ok, below is v3 which has the following changes:
> - Use a 32 bit load for the _access_flags field, instead of 64
> - Martin's implementation for s390 and fix for PPC
> - Faster LogTest version
> - Above changes based on Dan review
>
> I'm retesting in mach5 tiers1-6 (which tests x64 and aarch64 only) again
> with -XX:DiagnoseSyncOnPrimitiveWrappers=2. I checked it builds in
> arm32, ppc and s390.
>
> Full: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~pchilanomate/8242263/v3/webrev
> Inc: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~pchilanomate/8242263/v3/inc/webrev
>
>
> @Martin:
> Please check if the test doesn't timeout for you now with the changes I
> made to LogTest.
> Also, I tried to use tbnz in aarch64 and arm32 instead of tst + br
> (except for c2 since we actually need to set the condition flags), but
> for c1 I was getting an assertion in the compiler thread:
>
> guarantee(chk == -1 || chk == 0) failed: Field too big for insn
>
> This is the stack when that happens:
>
> MacroAssembler::pd_patch_instruction_size(unsigned char*, unsigned
> char*)+0x398
> AbstractAssembler::bind(Label&)+0x118
> MonitorEnterStub::emit_code(LIR_Assembler*)+0x28
> LIR_Assembler::emit_slow_case_stubs()+0x54
> Compilation::emit_code_body()+0x17c
>
> The change was simply:
>
> diff --git a/src/hotspot/cpu/aarch64/c1_MacroAssembler_aarch64.cpp
> b/src/hotspot/cpu/aarch64/c1_MacroAssembler_aarch64.cpp
> --- a/src/hotspot/cpu/aarch64/c1_MacroAssembler_aarch64.cpp
> +++ b/src/hotspot/cpu/aarch64/c1_MacroAssembler_aarch64.cpp
> @@ -78,7 +78,6 @@
> if (DiagnoseSyncOnPrimitiveWrappers != 0) {
> load_klass(hdr, obj);
> - ldr(hdr, Address(hdr, Klass::access_flags_offset()));
> - tst(hdr, JVM_ACC_IS_BOX_CLASS);
> - br(Assembler::NE, slow_case);
> + ldrw(hdr, Address(hdr, Klass::access_flags_offset()));
> + tbnz(hdr, exact_log2(JVM_ACC_IS_BOX_CLASS), slow_case);
> }
>
> So the issue must be related to where we want to jump.
>
> Thanks,
> Patricio
>> Dan
>>
>>
>> On 8/5/20 9:01 AM, Patricio Chilano wrote:
>>> Hi Martin,
>>>
>>> On 8/5/20 4:47 AM, Doerr, Martin wrote:
>>>> Hi Patricio,
>>>>
>>>> using 8 Byte load instructions for jint fields is a terrible coding
>>>> style!
>>>> Someone else may see it and use an 8 Byte store. Will result in
>>>> great fun for debugging!
>>>>
>>>> And on Big Endian you will simply access the wrong bits.
>>> Ah, of course! Those 32 bits will be in the wrong place when doing
>>> the test.
>>>
>>>> Note that Big Endian Platforms are AIX, old linux ppc, s390, SPARC.
>>>> I don't think you have tested on them.
>>>>
>>>>> We could remove the nested synchronized statements in the run() method
>>>>> so that we don't generate that much logging. We could also lower
>>>>> LOOP_COUNT. I think the issue is also because we are running LogTest
>>>>> with multiple flag combinations. Not sure what we should touch first.
>>>>> Maybe the synchronized statements, have only one or two and test that
>>>>> first?
>>>> Sounds like helpful ideas. Please go ahead and strip things down.
>>> Great, I will send v3 later with those changes.
>>>
>>> Thanks Martin!
>>>
>>> Patricio
>>>> Thanks for taking care of it.
>>>>
>>>> Best regards,
>>>> Martin
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: Patricio Chilano <patricio.chilano.mateo at oracle.com>
>>>>> Sent: Dienstag, 4. August 2020 20:26
>>>>> To: Doerr, Martin <martin.doerr at sap.com>; David Holmes
>>>>> <david.holmes at oracle.com>; hotspot-runtime-dev at openjdk.java.net;
>>>>> hotspot-jfr-dev at openjdk.java.net
>>>>> Subject: Re: RFR 8242263: Diagnose synchronization on primitive
>>>>> wrappers
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Martin,
>>>>>
>>>>> On 8/4/20 1:35 PM, Doerr, Martin wrote:
>>>>>> Hi Patricio,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Ok, I'll change it to movl + testl and test it out before sending
>>>>>>> v3.
>>>>>> Thanks. I forgot to mention arm + aarch64.
>>>>>> Aarch64 uses ldrw + tbnz.
>>>>>> Arm 32 bit uses ldr_u32 + tbnz.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I remember having seen the same mistake ��
>>>>>> And nobody noticed it on little Endian platforms.
>>>>> Ok, I can use a tbnz instead of test and then a branch on arm32 and
>>>>> aarch64.
>>>>> Shouldn't a normal ldr in arm32 work fine?
>>>>> Also in 64 bits (either x64 or aarch64) I don't see the issue of
>>>>> using a
>>>>> 64 bit load, besides the fact that we only care about the first 32
>>>>> bits.
>>>>> Regardless of the endianness, aren't we masking out the upper part
>>>>> when
>>>>> we do AND/TEST or if we test a bit in the 0-31 bit range? Otherwise it
>>>>> seems it should have failed for one of those platforms in my tests.
>>>>>
>>>>>>> I see that some tests use @run driver/timeout=xxxx. Maybe you can
>>>>>>> specify that and see if that fixes it? Let me know if that works
>>>>>>> and I
>>>>>>> can add it to the test.
>>>>>> That seems to have an effect. But now I'm not patient enough to
>>>>>> wait for
>>>>> the test to finish.
>>>>>> Maybe the problem is that I'm using slow debug builds.
>>>>>> But is there a chance to make the test quicker without losing
>>>>>> coverage
>>>>> significantly?
>>>>>> I think the test is too slow this way to run it on a regular
>>>>>> basis. We'd need to
>>>>> spend dedicated machines for it.
>>>>> We could remove the nested synchronized statements in the run() method
>>>>> so that we don't generate that much logging. We could also lower
>>>>> LOOP_COUNT. I think the issue is also because we are running LogTest
>>>>> with multiple flag combinations. Not sure what we should touch first.
>>>>> Maybe the synchronized statements, have only one or two and test that
>>>>> first?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Patricio
>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>> Martin
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>>> From: Patricio Chilano <patricio.chilano.mateo at oracle.com>
>>>>>>> Sent: Dienstag, 4. August 2020 17:47
>>>>>>> To: Doerr, Martin <martin.doerr at sap.com>; David Holmes
>>>>>>> <david.holmes at oracle.com>; hotspot-runtime-dev at openjdk.java.net;
>>>>>>> hotspot-jfr-dev at openjdk.java.net
>>>>>>> Subject: Re: RFR 8242263: Diagnose synchronization on primitive
>>>>>>> wrappers
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi Martin,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks for fixing PPC and taking care of s390!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 8/4/20 11:18 AM, Doerr, Martin wrote:
>>>>>>>> Hi Patricio,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I suggest to use movl + testl for checking the access flag as
>>>>>>>> for other
>>>>> access
>>>>>>> flags on x64.
>>>>>>> Ok, I'll change it to movl + testl and test it out before sending
>>>>>>> v3.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> New version for PPC64 and s390 see below.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The test SyncOnPrimitiveWrapperTest produces hs_err files as
>>>>> expected.
>>>>>>> However, I'm getting timeout issues:
>>>>>>>> timed out (timeout set to 120000ms, elapsed time including timeout
>>>>>>> handling was 122372ms)
>>>>>>>> Can we provide more time?
>>>>>>> I see that some tests use @run driver/timeout=xxxx. Maybe you can
>>>>>>> specify that and see if that fixes it? Let me know if that works
>>>>>>> and I
>>>>>>> can add it to the test.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>> Patricio
>>>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>>>> Martin
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> diff -r 77852e129401 src/hotspot/cpu/ppc/c1_MacroAssembler_ppc.cpp
>>>>>>>> --- a/src/hotspot/cpu/ppc/c1_MacroAssembler_ppc.cpp Tue Aug 04
>>>>>>> 10:03:57 2020 +0200
>>>>>>>> +++ b/src/hotspot/cpu/ppc/c1_MacroAssembler_ppc.cpp Tue Aug 04
>>>>>>> 16:04:31 2020 +0200
>>>>>>>> @@ -107,8 +107,8 @@
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> if (DiagnoseSyncOnPrimitiveWrappers != 0) {
>>>>>>>> load_klass(Rscratch, Roop);
>>>>>>>> - ld(Rscratch, in_bytes(Klass::access_flags_offset()),
>>>>>>>> Rscratch);
>>>>>>>> - andi(Rscratch, Rscratch, JVM_ACC_IS_BOX_CLASS);
>>>>>>>> + lwz(Rscratch, in_bytes(Klass::access_flags_offset()),
>>>>>>>> Rscratch);
>>>>>>>> + testbitdi(CCR0, R0, Rscratch,
>>>>>>>> exact_log2(JVM_ACC_IS_BOX_CLASS));
>>>>>>>> bne(CCR0, slow_case);
>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> diff -r 77852e129401 src/hotspot/cpu/ppc/interp_masm_ppc_64.cpp
>>>>>>>> --- a/src/hotspot/cpu/ppc/interp_masm_ppc_64.cpp Tue Aug 04
>>>>>>> 10:03:57 2020 +0200
>>>>>>>> +++ b/src/hotspot/cpu/ppc/interp_masm_ppc_64.cpp Tue Aug 04
>>>>>>> 16:04:31 2020 +0200
>>>>>>>> @@ -912,8 +912,8 @@
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> if (DiagnoseSyncOnPrimitiveWrappers != 0) {
>>>>>>>> load_klass(tmp, object);
>>>>>>>> - ld(tmp, in_bytes(Klass::access_flags_offset()), tmp);
>>>>>>>> - andi(tmp, tmp, JVM_ACC_IS_BOX_CLASS);
>>>>>>>> + lwz(tmp, in_bytes(Klass::access_flags_offset()), tmp);
>>>>>>>> + testbitdi(CCR0, R0, tmp, exact_log2(JVM_ACC_IS_BOX_CLASS));
>>>>>>>> bne(CCR0, slow_case);
>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> diff -r 77852e129401 src/hotspot/cpu/ppc/macroAssembler_ppc.cpp
>>>>>>>> --- a/src/hotspot/cpu/ppc/macroAssembler_ppc.cpp Tue Aug 04
>>>>>>> 10:03:57 2020 +0200
>>>>>>>> +++ b/src/hotspot/cpu/ppc/macroAssembler_ppc.cpp Tue Aug 04
>>>>>>> 16:04:31 2020 +0200
>>>>>>>> @@ -2838,8 +2838,8 @@
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> if (DiagnoseSyncOnPrimitiveWrappers != 0) {
>>>>>>>> load_klass(temp, oop);
>>>>>>>> - ld(temp, in_bytes(Klass::access_flags_offset()), temp);
>>>>>>>> - andi(temp, temp, JVM_ACC_IS_BOX_CLASS);
>>>>>>>> + lwz(temp, in_bytes(Klass::access_flags_offset()), temp);
>>>>>>>> + testbitdi(CCR0, R0, temp, exact_log2(JVM_ACC_IS_BOX_CLASS));
>>>>>>>> bne(CCR0, cont);
>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> diff -r 77852e129401
>>>>> src/hotspot/cpu/s390/c1_MacroAssembler_s390.cpp
>>>>>>>> --- a/src/hotspot/cpu/s390/c1_MacroAssembler_s390.cpp Tue Aug 04
>>>>>>> 10:03:57 2020 +0200
>>>>>>>> +++ b/src/hotspot/cpu/s390/c1_MacroAssembler_s390.cpp Tue Aug 04
>>>>>>> 16:04:31 2020 +0200
>>>>>>>> @@ -91,6 +91,12 @@
>>>>>>>> // Save object being locked into the BasicObjectLock...
>>>>>>>> z_stg(obj, Address(disp_hdr,
>>>>> BasicObjectLock::obj_offset_in_bytes()));
>>>>>>>> + if (DiagnoseSyncOnPrimitiveWrappers != 0) {
>>>>>>>> + load_klass(Z_R1_scratch, obj);
>>>>>>>> + testbit(Address(Z_R1_scratch, Klass::access_flags_offset()),
>>>>>>> exact_log2(JVM_ACC_IS_BOX_CLASS));
>>>>>>>> + z_btrue(slow_case);
>>>>>>>> + }
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> if (UseBiasedLocking) {
>>>>>>>> biased_locking_enter(obj, hdr, Z_R1_scratch,
>>>>>>>> Z_R0_scratch, done,
>>>>>>> &slow_case);
>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>> diff -r 77852e129401 src/hotspot/cpu/s390/interp_masm_s390.cpp
>>>>>>>> --- a/src/hotspot/cpu/s390/interp_masm_s390.cpp Tue Aug 04 10:03:57
>>>>>>> 2020 +0200
>>>>>>>> +++ b/src/hotspot/cpu/s390/interp_masm_s390.cpp Tue Aug 04
>>>>> 16:04:31
>>>>>>> 2020 +0200
>>>>>>>> @@ -1000,6 +1000,12 @@
>>>>>>>> // Load markWord from object into displaced_header.
>>>>>>>> z_lg(displaced_header, oopDesc::mark_offset_in_bytes(),
>>>>>>>> object);
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> + if (DiagnoseSyncOnPrimitiveWrappers != 0) {
>>>>>>>> + load_klass(Z_R1_scratch, object);
>>>>>>>> + testbit(Address(Z_R1_scratch, Klass::access_flags_offset()),
>>>>>>> exact_log2(JVM_ACC_IS_BOX_CLASS));
>>>>>>>> + z_btrue(slow_case);
>>>>>>>> + }
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> if (UseBiasedLocking) {
>>>>>>>> biased_locking_enter(object, displaced_header, Z_R1,
>>>>>>>> Z_R0, done,
>>>>>>> &slow_case);
>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>> diff -r 77852e129401 src/hotspot/cpu/s390/macroAssembler_s390.cpp
>>>>>>>> --- a/src/hotspot/cpu/s390/macroAssembler_s390.cpp Tue Aug 04
>>>>>>> 10:03:57 2020 +0200
>>>>>>>> +++ b/src/hotspot/cpu/s390/macroAssembler_s390.cpp Tue Aug 04
>>>>>>> 16:04:31 2020 +0200
>>>>>>>> @@ -3358,6 +3358,12 @@
>>>>>>>> // Load markWord from oop into mark.
>>>>>>>> z_lg(displacedHeader, 0, oop);
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> + if (DiagnoseSyncOnPrimitiveWrappers != 0) {
>>>>>>>> + load_klass(Z_R1_scratch, oop);
>>>>>>>> + testbit(Address(Z_R1_scratch, Klass::access_flags_offset()),
>>>>>>> exact_log2(JVM_ACC_IS_BOX_CLASS));
>>>>>>>> + z_btrue(done);
>>>>>>>> + }
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> if (try_bias) {
>>>>>>>> biased_locking_enter(oop, displacedHeader, temp, Z_R0,
>>>>>>>> done);
>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>
>>>
>>
>
More information about the hotspot-runtime-dev
mailing list