On Thu, 19 Sep 2024 05:03:42 GMT, Stefan Karlsson <stef...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> Yes, I saw that patch. I'm not sure I like the idea of cpu dependent code >> also doing the encoding. There were some C2 changes related to it that I >> didn't understand if that scheme required them. I don't see the down side >> to having the prototype header pre-encoded in the markWord. Seems simpler. > > We already have a cpu dependent code for both C1 and the interpreter. Adding > cpu dependent code to C2 doesn't make it significantly worse. My latest patch > also refactors the code so that C1, interpreter, and C2 all calls into shared > functions in the macro assembler. Could you please point me to the C2 change? Is it going to be integrated in this PR? We in Graal have not yet adopted `Klass::_prototype_header` and will hold if you decide to get rid of it ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/20677#discussion_r1766642585
