On Wed, 24 Jun 2026 13:23:59 GMT, Jaikiran Pai <[email protected]> wrote:

>> David Simms has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a 
>> merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains 2847 commits:
>> 
>>  - Merge branch '8317277' into jep401_sub_review_8317278
>>  - Merge remote-tracking branch 'valhalla/lworld' into 8317277
>>  - 8387024: [lworld] Remove the mention of mutexes from the specification 
>> text of value classes
>>    
>>    Reviewed-by: alanb, dholmes, liach
>>  - 8387054: [lworld] BACKOUT JDK-8375694 C2: Dead loop constructed with 
>> CastPP in late inlining
>>    
>>    Reviewed-by: dholmes
>>  - 8386904: [lworld] ProblemList tests that fail due to JDK-8375645 on all 
>> platforms
>>    8387050: [lworld] ProblemList two 
>> compiler/valhalla/inlinetypes/TestValueClasses.java sub-tests in Xcomp mode
>>    
>>    Reviewed-by: dholmes
>>  - 8386638: [lworld] Port JEP 401 to PPC64
>>    
>>    Co-authored-by: Richard Reingruber <[email protected]>
>>    Reviewed-by: dbriemann, rrich, lfoltan
>>  - Merge
>>    
>>    Merge jdk-28+3
>>  - 8386815: [lworld] Reduce the number of constructors in IdentityException
>>    
>>    Reviewed-by: liach, alanb
>>  - 8386626: [lworld] Only enable valhalla IR tests in 
>> ScalarReplacementWithGCBarrierTests.java for aarch64 and x86
>>    
>>    Reviewed-by: mhaessig, mchevalier
>>  - 8386718: [lworld] C2: Integer overflow in arraycopy scaling for flat 
>> arrays
>>    
>>    Reviewed-by: qamai
>>  - ... and 2837 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/915efc50...5bc36893
>
> src/hotspot/share/prims/jvm.cpp line 445:
> 
>> 443:   }
>> 444:   if (ak->is_flatArray_klass()) {
>> 445:     // The whole JVM_CopyOfSpecialArray is currently broken. Fix this 
>> in a separate bugfix.
> 
> Is this comment accurate and still relevant? Are there any fixes expected 
> here before this is integrated through JEP-401?

I have filed https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8387251 for this.

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/31122#discussion_r3468345845

Reply via email to