RFR (M): 7023898: Intrinsify AtomicLongFieldUpdater.getAndIncrement()

Vladimir Kozlov vladimir.kozlov at oracle.com
Mon Jun 25 12:08:51 PDT 2012

Even so John said you can use LS I would suggest to use full name. Why not use 
nodes names? For a example: GetAndAdd, GetAndSet, CompareAndSwap. It is easier 
to understand the meaning.

The rest is good.


Roland Westrelin wrote:
> Here is a new webrev:
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~roland/7023898/webrev.01/
> that takes these suggestions into account:
>> The C2 part looks good.  I have a few small suggestions.
>> 1. Replace push(cas) by push_node(type, load_store).
>> 2. I don't understand why the (kind = cmpxchg) case doesn't push a 
>> result.  Does't the original push(cas) do that?
>> 3. In the if/else chain testing 'kind', change the bare 'else' to 
>> 'else if (kind ≡ cmpxchg)' and follow up with 'else 
>> ShouldNotReachHere()'.  At least put an "assert(kind ≡ cmpxchg)".  
>> This will ease maintenance, in case somebody adds a new case to 
>> load_store_kind.
>> 4. Naming:  Consider using a more type-like name for load_store_kind, 
>> such as LoadStoreKind.  Compare ReexecuteState and NodeType enums.  
>> Also, the enum names themselves could use a prefix or camel-case, 
>> e.g., LS_xadd or _xadd or XAdd.  Since the names are private to 
>> library_call.cpp, it doesn't matter as much as in other places, but it 
>> still improves readability of code that contains the names.  (Reason:  
>> an all-lower-case simple name like xadd appears at first glance to be 
>> a local variable.  Manifest constants should look different.)
> Roland.

More information about the hotspot-compiler-dev mailing list