On Thu, 1 May 2025 01:51:07 GMT, Vladimir Ivanov <vliva...@openjdk.org> wrote:
> assert(success || !AOTCodeCache::is_dumping_adapters(), ""); This condtion `!AOTCodeCache::is_dumping_adapters()` in the assert is not very intuitive. I think what we need to assert is future stores in the aot code cache are disabled. So having a method like `AOTCodeCache::is_store_disabled()` would better communicate the intent here. But I don't mind keeping this condition for this initial PR. I will just suggest to add a better assert message like: ```assert(success || !AOTCodeCache::is_dumping_adapters(), "storing of adapter must be disabled");``` And I think we should also be setting `_adapter_caching` to false in `report_load_failure` and `report_store_failure` to be consistent, otherwise we may end up in a situation where `AOTAdapterCaching` is false but `_adapter_caching` is true. In fact, I feel we should only be setting `_adapter_caching` and not `AOTAdapterCaching` in `report_load/store_failure` because `_adapter_caching` is the flag used to gate store/load operations. ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/24740#discussion_r2070387521
