RFR: JDK-8172791 fixing issues with Reserved Stack Area

[Daniel D. Daugherty]

On 6/30/17 9:03 AM, Andrew Haley wrote:
> Just to explain why this patch is needed: without it, JEP 270
> (ReservedStackArea) does not work at all if a method with a
> ReservedStack annotation is inlined.  Which, in practice, is all the
> time, because aggressive inlining is what C2 does.
>
> Can somebody please have a look at this?
>
>
> On 18/04/17 15:47, Frederic Parain wrote:
>> Greetings,
>>
>> Please review this fix which addresses several issues with the
>> ReservedStackArea implementation:
>>     1 - the method look_for_reserved_stack_annotated_method() fails to
>> detect in-lined
>>          annotated methods, making the annotation ineffective for
>> in-lined methods
>>     2 - sometime an assertion failure related to reserved area status
>> occurs after incorrect
>>          restoring of guards pages during a return from runtime
>>
>> Bug:
>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8172791
>>
>> webrev:
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~fparain/8172791/webrev.00/index.html

src/cpu/x86/vm/interp_masm_x86.cpp
     Is the deletion of:

     L1083:     push(rthread);

     related to the assertion failure part of the fix? It looks like
     it is just fixing a call protocol error (pushing rthread when it
     is not needed), but I'm not sure.

src/share/vm/code/compiledMethod.cpp
     No comments.

src/share/vm/code/compiledMethod.hpp
     No comments.

src/share/vm/opto/compile.cpp
     No comments.

src/share/vm/runtime/sharedRuntime.cpp
     L3157:         for (ScopeDesc *sd = nm->scope_desc_near(fr.pc()); 
sd; sd = sd->sender()) {
         nit: implied boolean with 'sd;'
              please change to:    'sd != NULL;'

test/runtime/ReservedStack/ReservedStackTest.java
     Why stop running the test on -Xint?


Thumbs up on the fix.


This fix is going to need a review from someone on the
Compiler team also. Fred, who did your JEP-270 reviews
from the Compiler team?

Dan


>>
>> This fix has been contributed by Andrew Haley.
>>
>> Thank you,
>>
>> Fred