Tom,

So it is safe to skip the type check at this place because
in an other place (in ciTypeFlow) we already have such check?

Your new comment says that we don't do type check because it will fail anyway
but it does not explain why it is safe to skip it at that place.

Thanks,
Vladimir

Tom Rodriguez wrote:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~never/6915557

6915557: assert(_gvn.type(l)->higher_equal(type),"must constrain OSR typestate") with debug build
Reviewed-by:

The fix for 6892079 to eliminate asserts about address types in OSR
was insufficient because sometimes method liveness may consider locals
to live that actually aren't because of the conservativeness of its
analysis. I think the fix is simply to not check address types. If
the OSR entry point has any live address we will fail this test but
the resonsibility for making sure that we don't actually have a live
jsr during OSR entry is managed by ciTypeFlow itself so it should be
safe to simply skip the check. Tested with failing test case.

src/share/vm/opto/parse1.cpp

Search Discussions

Discussion Posts

Previous

Follow ups

Related Discussions

Discussion Navigation
viewthread | post
posts ‹ prev | 2 of 8 | next ›
Discussion Overview
grouphotspot-compiler-dev @
categoriesopenjdk
postedFeb 24, '10 at 5:29p
activeFeb 25, '10 at 11:38a
posts8
users2
websiteopenjdk.java.net

2 users in discussion

Vladimir Kozlov: 4 posts Tom Rodriguez: 4 posts

People

Translate

site design / logo © 2021 Grokbase