RFR (S): 8011138: C2: stack overflow in compiler thread because of recursive inlining of lambda form methods

Vladimir Kozlov vladimir.kozlov at oracle.com
Thu Oct 3 14:31:35 PDT 2013


Put callee_method->is_compiled_lambda_form() and 
jvms->map()->argument(jvms, 0)->uncast() into local vars outside loop 
since they are invariants.

Also both branches have to check (j->method() == callee_method). It 
could be checked first:

       if (j->method() == callee_method) {
         if (callee_is_compiled_lambda_form) {
           // Since compiled lambda forms are heavily reused we allow 
recursive inlining.
           // If it is truly a recursion (using the same "receiver") we 
limit inlining
           // otherwise we can easily blow the compiler stack.
           Node* caller_argument0 = j->map()->argument(j, 0)->uncast();
           if (caller_argument0 == callee_argument0) {
         } else {


On 10/3/13 1:41 PM, Christian Thalinger wrote:
> On Oct 3, 2013, at 11:28 AM, Roland Westrelin <roland.westrelin at oracle.com> wrote:
>>>> You should probably use:
>>>> caller_argument0->uncast() == callee_argument0->uncast()
>>> I can but it's probably not necessary.  If it's truly a recursive call even the CheckCastPP node should be the same, right?
>> With 8024070, that will add Cast nodes in many places, I don't think that will necessarily be the case.
> Fair enough.  I've added the uncast() calls:
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~twisti/8011138/webrev.01/
>> Roland.

More information about the hotspot-compiler-dev mailing list