RFR(XS): 8202425: [s390] C2: Wrong unsigned comparison with 0
martin.doerr at sap.com
Mon Apr 30 15:01:22 UTC 2018
unfortunately, we're using "branch if >".
"branch if !=" would be equivalent and not cause this error.
Removing the node only leads to larger instructions getting emitted which should be affordable.
From: Aleksey Shipilev [mailto:shade at redhat.com]
Sent: Montag, 30. April 2018 16:52
To: Doerr, Martin <martin.doerr at sap.com>; 'hotspot-compiler-dev at openjdk.java.net' <hotspot-compiler-dev at openjdk.java.net>
Subject: Re: RFR(XS): 8202425: [s390] C2: Wrong unsigned comparison with 0
On 04/30/2018 04:18 PM, Doerr, Martin wrote:
> compU_reg_imm0. It's used for unsigned comparison with 0, but it's implemented as signed
I am curious. Why do we care about signness when comparing to zero?
More information about the hotspot-compiler-dev