[9] RFR (XS): 8058828: Wrong ciConstant type for arrays from ConstantPool::_resolved_reference

[Vladimir Ivanov]

Vladimir, John, thanks for the review.

Best regards,
Vladimir Ivanov

On 10/1/14, 10:03 PM, Vladimir Kozlov wrote:
> On 10/1/14 10:34 AM, John Rose wrote:
>> Reviewed.
>>
>> On Oct 1, 2014, at 10:15 AM, Vladimir Kozlov
>> <vladimir.kozlov at oracle.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 10/1/14 4:07 AM, Vladimir Ivanov wrote:
>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~vlivanov/8058828/webrev.00/
>>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8058828
>>>>
>>>> There are 2 unrelated problems for the same scenario.
>>>>
>>>> ciEnv::get_constant_by_index_impl doesn't distinguish T_OBJECT &
>>>> T_ARRAY cases for constant pool patches in VM anonymous
>>>> classes.
>>>> The fix is to adjust the type, if a constant value is an array.
>>>
>>> Should we add check that class is anonymous? Can this be in normal
>>> class?
>>
>> It can't be a normal class at present.  When we get array constants,
>> that will change.
>>
>> I lean towards keeping the assert as-is, and not adding a new test for
>> kind of class.  But I would be OK either way.
>
> Thank you John. then lets keep it as it is. Reviewed.
>
> Vladimir
>
>>
>> — John
>>
>>>
>>>> ciTypeFlow::StateVector::do_ldc has too strong assertion. Since
>>>> basic_type = {T_OBJECT|T_ARRAY}, obj->is_array() should
>>>> be also expected.
>>>
>>> This is good.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Vladimir
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Testing: failing tests, regression test.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks!
>>>>
>>>> Best regards,
>>>> Vladimir Ivanov
>>