Gently reminder
On 09.10.2014 19:56, Joe Darcy wrote:
Looks fine Konstantin.
(These tests have been failing very often since they were pushed. If
your fix isn't pushed today, I'd argue for the tests being excluded.)
Please, review
Thanks,
-Joe
On 10/9/2014 1:44 AM, Konstantin Shefov wrot
Looks good.
Best regards,
Vladimir Ivanov
On 10/9/14, 12:44 PM, Konstantin Shefov wrote:
Hi,
I have updated the webrev to take into account the JDK 9 new feature
with segmented code cache.
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~kshefov/8058733/webrev.02
Please, review.
-Konstantin
On 08.10.2014 21:25,
Thanks for reviewing! Pushed.
-Konstantin
10.10.2014 19:06, Vladimir Ivanov пишет:
Looks good.
Best regards,
Vladimir Ivanov
On 10/9/14, 12:44 PM, Konstantin Shefov wrote:
Hi,
I have updated the webrev to take into account the JDK 9 new feature
with segmented code cache.
http://cr.openjdk.j
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~vlivanov/8059877/webrev.00/
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8059877
LambdaForm sharing introduces profile pollution in compiled LambdaForms.
The most serious consequence is inlining distortion, which severely
degrade peak performance. The main victim is guar
Hi Vladimir,
Why do you need getHistoricInt ?
Is it because Unsafe.getInt() doesn't do any constant folding ?
BTW, why getHistoricInt is named getHistoricInt ?
cheers,
Rémi
On 10/10/2014 09:08 PM, Vladimir Ivanov wrote:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~vlivanov/8059877/webrev.00/
https://bugs.open
Remi,
Why do you need getHistoricInt ?
Is it because Unsafe.getInt() doesn't do any constant folding ?
Exactly. I need a compile-time constant to feed it to the compiler to
guide compilation.
BTW, why getHistoricInt is named getHistoricInt ?
From application perspective, the call returns cur
On 10/10/2014 10:42 PM, Vladimir Ivanov wrote:
Remi,
Why do you need getHistoricInt ?
Is it because Unsafe.getInt() doesn't do any constant folding ?
Exactly. I need a compile-time constant to feed it to the compiler to
guide compilation.
BTW, why getHistoricInt is named getHistoricInt ?
F
