On Wed, 26 Nov 2025 16:48:57 GMT, Volodymyr Paprotski <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Marked as reviewed by ascarpino (Reviewer). > > Oh.. realized that I should had checked JBS.. thanks @ascarpino for resolving > the bug I caused! At least its just the option.. whew. > >> @dholmes-ora Hi David, need some help with this please, don't have access to >> an ARM system to reproduce (or the ARM expertise).. could you point me at >> the failing job if thats available? Or some log if not? >> >> * Is it an issue with the options (i.e. `-XX:UseAVX=2` perhaps). I probably >> should had added `-XX:+IgnoreUnrecognizedVMOptions` to it.. >> * Otherwise, I am stumped.. the test case isn't architecture-specific.. it >> calls two methods (one of which is annotated as an intrinsic..) and expects >> them to return the same value.. i.e. Java and Intrinsic version should >> behave the same.. >> * Only thing I can think of.. The ARM implementation took some shortcuts in >> name of optimization. This can be entirely valid if the code calling the >> intrinsics never should get some specific value (-ranges). i.e. the tests >> RNG be further restricted.. >> * Otherwise.. is it possible its a bug in the ARM intrinsic? This caused a regression: [JDK-8372703](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8372703). @vpaprotsk Could you please have a look? Thanks. ------------- PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/28136#issuecomment-3588349196
