On 2019-02-27 03:25, Jie Fu wrote:
Hi Tobias,
Thanks a lot for your review.
It's a bit difficult for me to test this patch since I don't have a
sparc or arm machine.
I've analyzed the adlc processing logic in
make/hotspot/gensrc/GensrcAdlc.gmk finding that ad-files under
./src/hotspot/os_cpu/$(HOTSPOT_TARGET_OS)_$(HOTSPOT_TARGET_CPU_ARCH)
are optional.
What do you mean by "optional"? The build code does this:
##############################################################################
# Concatenate all ad source files into a single file, which will be
fed to
# adlc.
...
AD_SRC_FILES := $(call uniq, $(wildcard $(foreach d, $(AD_SRC_ROOTS), \
$d/cpu/$(HOTSPOT_TARGET_CPU_ARCH)/$(HOTSPOT_TARGET_CPU).ad \
$d/cpu/$(HOTSPOT_TARGET_CPU_ARCH)/$(HOTSPOT_TARGET_CPU_ARCH).ad \
$d/os_cpu/$(HOTSPOT_TARGET_OS)_$(HOTSPOT_TARGET_CPU_ARCH)/$(HOTSPOT_TARGET_OS)_$(HOTSPOT_TARGET_CPU_ARCH).ad
\
)))
so it will definitely pick up both those files and use it in creating
the concatenated ad file.
That being said, maybe this is not the correct behavior.
I see that the linux_sparc.ad file is essentially empty, so you can
probably remove that. The aarch64 file otoh seems to contain valid code.
I would not presume that you can just remove it!
/Magnus
Since both linux_sparc.ad and linux_aarch64.ad are useless for the
generation of C2, it would be better to remove them.
I'll try my best to test it.
By the way, I really appreciate If someone with sparc or aarch64
development environment could help to verify this change.
Thanks in advance.
Best regards,
Jie
On 2019/2/27 上午12:51, Tobias Hartmann wrote:
Hi Jie,
this looks good to me assuming that you have tested the change on
these platforms.
Best regards,
Tobias
On 21.02.19 10:35, Jie Fu wrote:
Hi all,
The following two source files are useless for the generation of C2
and should be removed.
1) ./src/hotspot/os_cpu/linux_sparc/linux_sparc.ad
2) ./src/hotspot/os_cpu/linux_aarch64/linux_aarch64.ad
Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8219519
Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jiefu/8219519/webrev.00/
Could you please review it?
Thanks a lot.
Best regards,
Jie
