On Mon, 19 Jan 2026 15:49:49 GMT, Emanuel Peter <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Jatin Bhateja has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a >> merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains 28 commits: >> >> - Merge branch 'master' of http://github.com/openjdk/jdk into JDK-8370691 >> - Adding testpoint for JDK-8373574 >> - Review comments resolutions >> - Merge branch 'master' of http://github.com/openjdk/jdk into JDK-8370691 >> - Fix incorrect argument passed to smokeTest >> - Fix from Bhavana Kilambi for failing JTREG regressions on AARCH64 >> - Merge branch 'master' of http://github.com/openjdk/jdk into JDK-8370691 >> - Including test changes from Bhavana Kilambi (ARM) >> - Merge branch 'master' of http://github.com/openjdk/jdk into JDK-8370691 >> - Optimizing tail handling >> - ... and 18 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/499b5882...273b219e > > src/hotspot/share/utilities/globalDefinitions.hpp line 741: > >> 739: inline bool is_custom_basic_type(BasicType t) { >> 740: return (t == T_FLOAT16); >> 741: } > > What exactly is the definition of a "custom" basic type? Is it defined > somewhere? > If not, it would be useful to define it here. > > I assume you chose the name because we expect more such "custom" basic types > in the future? You are right, primarily basic types are driven by JVM language specification...in this case T_FLOAT16 is a non standard basic type. > test/jdk/jdk/incubator/vector/IntVectorMaxTests.java line 68: > >> 66: static IntVector bcast_vec = IntVector.broadcast(SPECIES, (int)10); >> 67: >> 68: static void AssertEquals(int actual, int expected) { > > There are lots of changes in this file that do not seem to have anything to > do with Float16. Please file them separately. It will make review much easier. I have added an assertion wrapper so that float16 values (short) can be converted to float before calling actual Assert.* routines to handle all possible NaN bit patterns. Since the tests are generate from common template hence these changes appear. ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/28002#discussion_r2708024220 PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/28002#discussion_r2708023788
