On Fri, 11 Sep 2026 16:00:37 GMT, John R Rose <[email protected]> wrote:
>> In current code I found this code which makes address table dependent on the
>> VM config:
>>
>>
>> if (ValueTypeReturnedAsFields) {
>>
>>
>>
>> ADD_EXTERNAL_ADDRESS(SharedRuntime::store_value_type_fields_to_buf);
>>
>>
>>
>> }
>>
>>
>> So we already have this problem in the current code base.
>
> One partial solution: Fold the conditional flag expression into the macro
> call, and have the macro somehow incorporate logic to check or assert that
> the condition is the same for AP (as recorded in cache) and TR.
>
> To be clear about priorities here: I don't think there is a significant bug
> here. I would support separate config-hardening PRs after this PR. I predict
> we are not going to get all the config checks shaken out in one go.
>
> But, a check of extrs-length will catch bugs (or a few at different phases)
> will make a broad fence against config alignment bugs on the addrs array. So
> I recommend that for this PR.
> So we already have this problem in the current code base.
I am wrong here. It is not a problem because the flag
`ValueTypeReturnedAsFields` is already being recorded in the AOTCodeCache
config.
-------------
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/30778#discussion_r3991135027
