On Wed, 10 Jun 2026 07:15:58 GMT, David Simms <[email protected]> wrote:

>> This is a "*sub-review pull request*" for the first 
>> [preview](https://openjdk.org/jeps/12) of [JEP 401: Value Classes and 
>> Objects](https://openjdk.org/jeps/401), specifically 
>> [JDK-8317278](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8317278): JVM 
>> implementation of value classes and objects.
>> 
>>> [!NOTE]
>>> This pull request and the other sub-review pull requests listed below are 
>>> based on the "*master pull request*" 
>>> (https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/31120). It contains the same full set 
>>> of code changes as the "*master pull request*" to preserve the full 
>>> implementation context; the language compiler, JVM, and standard library 
>>> changes are intertwined. This separate pull requests exist only to 
>>> subdivide the review and related discussion by area.
>> 
>> Other areas for review:
>> 
>> - [JDK-8317277](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8317277): Java language 
>> implementation of value classes and objects
>>   - https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/31121
>> - [JDK-8317279](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8317279): Standard 
>> library implementation of value classes and objects
>>   - https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/31123
>> 
>> Code changes resulting from the review process should be made in 
>> [`valhalla/lworld`](https://github.com/openjdk/valhalla/).
>> 
>> `valhalla/lworld` is currently updated from `jdk/master` whenever a weekly 
>> [`jdk` tag](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/tags) is created. At that time, 
>> code changes from `valhalla/lworld` will be propagated to the master pull 
>> request and to all sub-review pull requests, including this one.
>> 
>> Ultimately, review sign-off will be recorded on the "*master pull request*", 
>> and this pull request will be closed without integration.
>> 
>> This pull request has a large code surface area and often conflicts with 
>> `jdk/master` on a daily basis. Refer to 
>> [`valhalla/lworld`](https://github.com/openjdk/valhalla/) for the latest 
>> state of the project code, keeping in mind that it may lag several days 
>> behind `jdk/master`. Both repositories may be needed as references during 
>> review.
>> 
>> ---------
>> - [x] I confirm that I make this contribution in accordance with the 
>> [OpenJDK Interim AI Policy](https://openjdk.org/legal/ai).
>
> David Simms has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a 
> merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains 2798 commits:
> 
>  - Merge remote-tracking branch 'valhalla/lworld' into 
> jep401_sub_review_8317278
>  - 8386239: [lworld] Update jdk/java/util/Arrays/ArraysEqCmpTest.java
>    
>    Reviewed-by: liach
>  - 8386242: [lworld] Simplify and clarify StrictProcessor
>    
>    Reviewed-by: dsimms
>  - 8386140: [lworld] FieldReflector using wrong Class argument
>    
>    Reviewed-by: alanb, dsimms
>  - 8386216: [lworld] Rollback meaningless diff in EventClassBuilder
>    
>    Reviewed-by: dsimms
>  - 8385170: [lworld] Serialization spec needs to allow abstract value classes 
> like Number
>    
>    Reviewed-by: liach
>  - 8385980: [lworld] Standardize pattern for preview value class generation
>    
>    Reviewed-by: liach
>  - 8386086: [lworld] 
> sun/jvmstat/monitor/MonitoredVm/MonitorVmStartTerminate.java should be 
> removed from problem list
>    
>    Reviewed-by: liach, dcubed
>  - Merge
>    
>    Merge jdk-28+1
>  - 8386090: [lworld] Redundant test changes in lworld versus mainline
>    
>    Reviewed-by: vromero
>  - ... and 2788 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/92298786...f76a5106

Minor cleanup would be nice:

diff --git a/src/hotspot/cpu/aarch64/c1_LIRAssembler_aarch64.cpp 
b/src/hotspot/cpu/aarch64/c1_LIRAssembler_aarch64.cpp
index c74ff16ae26..1fc0f43ed6c 100644
--- a/src/hotspot/cpu/aarch64/c1_LIRAssembler_aarch64.cpp
+++ b/src/hotspot/cpu/aarch64/c1_LIRAssembler_aarch64.cpp
@@ -1640,15 +1640,13 @@ void 
LIR_Assembler::emit_opSubstitutabilityCheck(LIR_OpSubstitutabilityCheck* op
   move(op->not_equal_result(), op->result_opr());
   __ b(L_end);
 
-  __ bind(L_oops_equal);
-  move(op->equal_result(), op->result_opr());
-  __ b(L_end);
-
   // We've returned from the stub. R0 contains 0x0 IFF the two
   // operands are not substitutable. (Don't compare against 0x1 in case the
   // C compiler is naughty)
   __ bind(*op->stub()->continuation());
   __ cbz(r0, L_oops_not_equal); // (call_stub() == 0x0) -> not_equal
+
+  __ bind(L_oops_equal);
   move(op->equal_result(), op->result_opr()); // (call_stub() != 0x0) -> equal
   // fall-through
   __ bind(L_end);
diff --git a/src/hotspot/cpu/x86/c1_LIRAssembler_x86.cpp 
b/src/hotspot/cpu/x86/c1_LIRAssembler_x86.cpp
index 01f4a8c1fb7..0b219f53817 100644
--- a/src/hotspot/cpu/x86/c1_LIRAssembler_x86.cpp
+++ b/src/hotspot/cpu/x86/c1_LIRAssembler_x86.cpp
@@ -1639,16 +1639,14 @@ void 
LIR_Assembler::emit_opSubstitutabilityCheck(LIR_OpSubstitutabilityCheck* op
   move(op->not_equal_result(), op->result_opr());
   __ jmp(L_end);
 
-  __ bind(L_oops_equal);
-  move(op->equal_result(), op->result_opr());
-  __ jmp(L_end);
-
   // We've returned from the stub. RAX contains 0x0 IFF the two
   // operands are not substitutable. (Don't compare against 0x1 in case the
   // C compiler is naughty)
   __ bind(*op->stub()->continuation());
   __ cmpl(rax, 0);
   __ jcc(Assembler::equal, L_oops_not_equal); // (call_stub() == 0x0) -> 
not_equal
+
+  __ bind(L_oops_equal);
   move(op->equal_result(), op->result_opr()); // (call_stub() != 0x0) -> equal
   // fall-through
   __ bind(L_end);

-------------

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/31122#issuecomment-4684643821

Reply via email to