RFR(M): 8172049: [s390] Implement "JEP 270: Reserved Stack Areas for Critical Sections".
martin.doerr at sap.com
Fri Dec 30 16:06:19 UTC 2016
thank you very much for implementing my suggestions. It looks really good, now.
From: Lindenmaier, Goetz
Sent: Freitag, 30. Dezember 2016 11:43
To: Doerr, Martin <martin.doerr at sap.com>; hotspot-runtime-dev at openjdk.java.net
Subject: RE: RFR(M): 8172049: [s390] Implement "JEP 270: Reserved Stack Areas for Critical Sections".
thanks for the review in the holiday season :) New webrev:
> I was wondering why you use the compare relation "<=" to compare the
> stack pointer with the reserved stack activation while all other
> platforms use "<".
> Is it a mistake or is there a reason for it?
I changed it to <. Tests are running.
> Besides that, I only have minor suggestions:
> - reserved_stack_check always get Z_R14 as return pc which I think is
> the only useful argument. So I think it would be better to either
> remove the argument or to replace the lgr_if_needed by assert(return_pc==Z_R14...).
Changed to assert. I think the argument makes it obvious that the existing return pc must be set when branching to the exception.
> - In the ad file, the 2 parts of the safepoint poll are directly in
> juxtaposition with each other. They should better get combined.
Fixed. Yes, looks better.
> Besides this, the change looks very good. I think you have also tested
> this change in our nightly tests which look good.
> Thanks and best regards,
> -----Original Message-----
> From: hotspot-runtime-dev [mailto:hotspot-runtime-dev-
> bounces at openjdk.java.net] On Behalf Of Lindenmaier, Goetz
> Sent: Mittwoch, 28. Dezember 2016 08:41
> To: hotspot-runtime-dev at openjdk.java.net
> Subject: RFR(M): 8172049: [s390] Implement "JEP 270: Reserved Stack
> Areas for Critical Sections".
> This implements JEP 270 on s390.
> It's s390-only except for enabling the test, thus I need a sponsor.
> Please review.
> Best regards,
More information about the hotspot-runtime-dev