RFR 8218142 [lworld] C1 support for array covariance for aaload

[Frederic Parain]

Empty value types are not supported by the JVM yet.

Fred


> On Feb 6, 2019, at 17:39, Remi Forax <forax at univ-mlv.fr> wrote:
> 
> ----- Mail original -----
>> De: "Karen Kinnear" <karen.kinnear at oracle.com>
>> À: "Srikanth" <srikanth.adayapalam at oracle.com>
>> Cc: "valhalla-dev" <valhalla-dev at openjdk.java.net>
>> Envoyé: Mercredi 6 Février 2019 15:38:04
>> Objet: Re: RFR 8218142 [lworld] C1 support for array covariance for aaload
> 
>> Many thanks Srikanth for the covariance/non-covariance support.
>> 
>> And the current flags:
>> -XDallowWithFieldOperator: __WithField construct is allowed only when on
>> -XDallowGenericsOverValues: For values to parameterize generics, not for values
>> them
>> selves to be generic
>> -XDnonCovariantValueArrays: For experiments where VT[] is not a subtype of
>> j.l.O[]
>> -XDallowEmptyValues: Allow values that have no state
>> 
>> (I agree with getting rid of -XDdisallowValueConstructors if you didn’t do that
>> already)
>> 
>> thanks,
>> Karen
> 
> Hi Karen,
> is there already a support for empty value type in the VM ??
> 
> Rémi
> 
>> 
>>> On Feb 5, 2019, at 8:34 AM, Srikanth <srikanth.adayapalam at oracle.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Javac by default allows covariance now.
>>> 
>>> Srikanth
>>> 
>>> On 05/02/19 5:24 PM, Ioi Lam wrote:
>>>> If I remember correctly, some of them failed to compile or run after changes in
>>>> javac or hotspot-runtime that disallowed covariance. I'll re-enable them and
>>>> see what happens.
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks
>>>> 
>>>> - Ioi
>>>> 
>>>> On 2/5/19 3:06 AM, Tobias Hartmann wrote:
>>>>> Hi Ioi,
>>>>> 
>>>>> this looks good to me. Should we re-enable the tests marked with "TODO Re-enable
>>>>> if value type
>>>>> arrays become covariant with object arrays"? C2 already supports array
>>>>> covariance.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Tobias
>>>>> 
>>>>> On 31.01.19 13:52, Ioi Lam wrote:
>>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iklam/valhalla/8218142-aaload-covariance.v01/
>>>>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8218142
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> When loading from an array declared as Object[], now the C1 code checks if the
>>>>>> array is flattened.
>>>>>> If so, the loading is done via a runtime call.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Here's an example of the generated code
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>       mov    0x8(%rsi),%eax      ; rsi = array
>>>>>>       mov    $0x800000000,%r12
>>>>>>       add    %r12,%rax           ; rax = array klass
>>>>>>       xor    %r12,%r12           ; why is this here??
>>>>>>       mov    0xc(%rax),%eax      ; layout_helper
>>>>>>       sar    $0x1d,%eax
>>>>>>       cmp    $0xfffffffd,%eax    ; check for Klass::_lh_array_tag_vt_value
>>>>>>       je      L_3                ; slow case
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> L_1   movslq %edx,%rdx           ; non-flattened load
>>>>>>       mov    0x10(%rsi,%rdx,4),%eax
>>>>>>       shl    $0x3,%rax
>>>>>> L_2   ....
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> L_3   mov    %rsi,0x8(%rsp)      ; LoadFlattenedArrayStub slow case
>>>>>>       mov    %rdx,(%rsp)
>>>>>>       callq  0x00007fe6489c8840  ; runtime_call load_flattened_array
>>>>>>       jmpq    L_2
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> The code is pretty big and sub-optimal. My plan is to also get aastore working
>>>>>> first, and then
>>>>>> optimize.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> One possibility is to check if the array is actually an Object[] array. That
>>>>>> should help with the
>>>>>> erased generic types.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>       mov    0x8(%rsi),%eax      ; rsi = array
>>>>>> +     cmp    $0x00001234, %eax   ; compressed klass for [Ljava/lang/Object;
>>>>>> +     je     L_1                 ; go to non-flattened load
>>>>>>       mov    $0x800000000,%r12
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>> - Ioi