RFR(xs): 8210320: PPC64: Fix uninitialized variable in C1 LIR assembler code

[Gustavo Romero]

On 09/04/2018 11:15 AM, Doerr, Martin wrote:
> Hi Gustavo,
> 
>> I think it's still trivial as before?
> Yes.
> 
>> If so it means I can push it once I receive a second OK from you?
>>
>> I also think I don't need to push it first to the 'submit' repo since it's
>> a PPC64-only change. Is that correct?
> That's fine (assuming you have run a local build).

Sure :)


Regards,
Gustavo
  
> Best regards,
> Martin
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: hotspot-compiler-dev <hotspot-compiler-dev-bounces at openjdk.java.net> On Behalf Of Gustavo Romero
> Sent: Dienstag, 4. September 2018 16:11
> To: Aleksey Shipilev <shade at redhat.com>; hotspot-compiler-dev at openjdk.java.net; Baesken, Matthias <matthias.baesken at sap.com>
> Cc: ppc-aix-port-dev at openjdk.java.net
> Subject: Re: RFR(xs): 8210320: PPC64: Fix uninitialized variable in C1 LIR assembler code
> 
> Hi Matthias and Aleksey,
> 
> Thanks for reviewing it.
> 
> On 09/04/2018 10:49 AM, Aleksey Shipilev wrote:
>> On 09/04/2018 03:42 PM, Gustavo Romero wrote:
>>> May I please request reviews for this tiny change that fixes two
>>> uninitialized variables in PPC64 C1 LIR code?
>>>
>>> Bug   : https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8210320
>>> Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~gromero/8210320/v1/
>>
>> Looks good and trivial to me.
> 
> Aleksey, I've updated that change to include another case pointed out by Matthias:
> 
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~gromero/8210320/v2/
> 
> I think it's still trivial as before?
> 
> If so it means I can push it once I receive a second OK from you?
> 
> I also think I don't need to push it first to the 'submit' repo since it's
> a PPC64-only change. Is that correct?
> 
> Thank you.
> 
> Best regards,
> Gustavo
>