RFR: 8252388: Allocation without ResourceMark in InterpreterOopMap::resource_copy [v2]

[Coleen Phillimore]

> I added a ResourceMark to interpreter_frame_num_oops and kept getting confused with frame::interpreted_frame_num_oops, which I then realized is not used.  So I deleted that one.
> 
> I also added a ResourceMark to frame::interpreted_oops_do (the one that's used, and deleted the other) before the InterpreterOopMask definition.  This necessitated using CHeap for FrameValuesOopClosure data because adding to the resource allocated _values field in the oops_interpreted_do ResourceMark got an resource mark nesting assertion.
> 
> Also, I apologize for the whitespace changes.  My editor removes white space at the end of lines.  You'll have to remove them anyway.
> 
> Ran this test: mach5 --patch-based --extra-src-dirs /scratch/cphillim/hg/jdk-loom -j loom-tier1,loom-tier2 -b linux-x64-debug'

Coleen Phillimore has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge or a rebase. The incremental webrev excludes the unrelated changes brought in by the merge/rebase.

-------------

Changes:
  - all: https://git.openjdk.java.net/loom/pull/85/files
  - new: https://git.openjdk.java.net/loom/pull/85/files/43219b5e..43219b5e

Webrevs:
 - full: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=loom&pr=85&range=01
 - incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=loom&pr=85&range=00-01

  Stats: 0 lines in 0 files changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 0 mod
  Patch: https://git.openjdk.java.net/loom/pull/85.diff
  Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/loom pull/85/head:pull/85

PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/loom/pull/85