RFR (S) JDK-8041623: Solaris Studio 12.4 C++ 5.13, CHECK_UNHANDLED_OOPS use of class oop's copy constructor definitions causing error level diagnostic
lois.foltan at oracle.com
Tue May 27 21:49:23 UTC 2014
On 5/27/2014 5:29 PM, Coleen Phillimore wrote:
> Yes, this looks like a good solution.
> On 5/27/14, 1:47 PM, harold seigel wrote:
>> Hi Lois,
>> Your changes look good.
>> On 5/22/2014 1:40 PM, Lois Foltan wrote:
>>> Please review the following fix:
>>> Bug: Solaris Studio 12.4 C++ 5.13, CHECK_UNHANDLED_OOPS use of class
>>> oop's copy constructor definitions causing error level diagnostic
>>> Summary of fix:
>>> A couple of fixes for Solaris C++ 5.13 compilation issues
>>> specifically related to CHECK_UNHANDLED_OOPS support in non-product
>>> JVM builds. First, the following diagnostic occurred concerning a
>>> volatile oop being returned by value. C++ complained that the return
>>> value failed to correctly copy construct into a temporary when
>>> returning from target_volatile().
>>> "javaClasses.hpp", line 1183: Error: Initializing const volatile
>>> oop& requires an lvalue.
>>> "javaClasses.hpp", line 1183: Error: Formal argument o of type const
>>> volatile oop& in call to oop::oop(const volatile oop&) is being
>>> passed volatile oop.
>>> The fix required a user conversion from oop to OopDesc* with
>>> immediate oop construction to provide the lvalue needed. Solaris C++
>>> 5.13 also complained about the lack of an appropriate assignment
>>> operator from NULL to volatile oop. Solution was to explicitly
>>> construct NULL prior to assignment.
>>> Built with the following versions:
>>> carrs: g++ 4.4.3
>>> crocker: g++ 4.4.4
>>> philli: g++ 4.8.1
>>> Solaris C++ 5.10 (12u1)
>>> Solaris C++ 5.12 (12u3)
>>> Solaris C++ 5.13 - beta
>>> JPRT build & test,
>>> Hotspot jtreg on Solaris,
>>> Hotspot jtreg on Linux with -XX:+CheckUnhandledOops,
>>> vm.quick.testlist - 2 runs one with -XX:+CheckUnhandledOops and
>>> one without
>>> Thank you,
More information about the hotspot-runtime-dev