Request for review (XL): 6822110: Add AddressLiteral class on SPARC

Christian Thalinger Christian.Thalinger at Sun.COM
Wed Apr 1 12:40:22 PDT 2009

On Tue, 2009-03-31 at 14:28 -0700, Tom Rodriguez wrote:
> icBuffer_sparc.cpp:
> I believe we could the special reloc stuff completely here.  Passing  
> ForceRelocatable = true is useless assuming the rest of the comments  
> are right about not needing a reloc at all.  Could we remove the  
> ForceRelocatable version of sethi completely in favor of requiring the  
> use of AddressLiteral?

I think so.  I will have a look at it and when it's possible, I'll do
that change.

> interp_masp_sparc.cpp:
> you dropped the minus below:
> -  Address d_save(FP, 0, -sizeof(jdouble) + STACK_BIAS);
> +  Address d_save(FP, sizeof(jdouble) + STACK_BIAS);

Good catch!  It seems that one was the problem for the failing
GCBasher_ParNewGC test.  The last JPRT run was successful, while the
second run without this fix also failed.

> for this:
> Address lock_addr = Address(
> it should just be:
> Address lock_addr(


> assembler_sparc.hpp:
> why does load_contents take 2 registers?  All uses pass the same thing  
> for both.  It should just assume the dest is the temp.  Actually I  
> think that's true of all the new ones that take both a temp and a dest.

That sounds reasonable.  I will change that.

-- Christian

More information about the hotspot-compiler-dev mailing list