On Thu, 26 Sep 2024 15:59:50 GMT, Roberto Castañeda Lozano <rcastaned...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> Ok, this is indeed relevant and helpful. This could segfault if we happen to >> read from the very first object on the heap. I can solve this by allowing to >> copy only 8 bytes onto the stack: >> https://github.com/rkennke/jdk/commit/097c2afa04397773e514552dfb942aa889bfa2c1 >> >> Does this look correct to you? Or better to do it as a follow-up? >> (It passes a couple of indexOf tests, will run tier1-4 on it). > >> Does this look correct to you? Or better to do it as a follow-up? > > I do not feel confident enough to review this part. If you want to include > https://github.com/rkennke/jdk/commit/097c2afa04397773e514552dfb942aa889bfa2c1 > in this changeset, I would prefer that the original author of JDK-8320448 or > at least someone from Intel reviews it, otherwise I think it is fine to leave > it as a follow-up enhancement. @sviswa7 or @asgibbons WDYT about including https://github.com/rkennke/jdk/commit/097c2afa04397773e514552dfb942aa889bfa2c1 as part of compact object headers implementation? Otherwise we would have to disable indexOf intrinsic when running with compact headers, because of the assumption that array headers are >= 16 bytes, which is no longer true with compact headers. ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/20677#discussion_r1777396409
