On Mon, 26 Jan 2026 10:23:01 GMT, Axel Boldt-Christmas <[email protected]> 
wrote:

>> Hello,
>> 
>> Please refer to the JBS issue for a more detailed description of the 
>> background of this change. In summary, I suggest we only keep the array of 
>> InlineLayoutInfo for InstanceKlasses which need it, which are Klasses that 
>> have fields that have been inlined.
>> 
>> To make the transition to this easier, I suggest we change the following 
>> properties in FieldLayoutBuilder: 
>> 
>> _has_inline_type_fields
>> _has_flattening_information
>> 
>> to
>> 
>> _has_inlineable_fields
>> _has_inlined_fields
>> 
>> The `_has_inlineable_fields` property is only used for printing and 
>> `_has_inlined_fields` is the property we expose out to the ClassFileParser, 
>> telling us that this class has inlined fields, so the array of 
>> InlineLayoutInfo must be "preserved" and is possible to read from. Hence, 
>> the array is now only safe to access if `InstanceKlass::has_inlined_fields` 
>> is true, or simply if the actual field being accessed is flat 
>> (`fieldDescriptor::is_flat`).
>> 
>> I only found one place (in ciReplay.cpp) where we access the array of 
>> InlineLayoutInfo even though we might not have any inlined fields and only 
>> fields that are inlineable. I've changed this to use the normal "reference" 
>> path for fields that aren't flat.
>> 
>> Testing:
>> * Oracle's tier1-5, hotspot_valhalla and jdk_valhalla
>
> src/hotspot/share/classfile/classFileParser.cpp line 6393:
> 
>> 6391: }
>> 6392: 
>> 6393: void ClassFileParser::set_inline_layout_info_klass(int field_index, 
>> Klass* klass, TRAPS) {
> 
> This should be typed as `InstanceKlass* klass`. 
> 
> 2 out 3 call sites have that type, and the remaining can be trivially changed 
> to `InstanceKlass*`
> https://github.com/jsikstro/valhalla/blob/ae50201a1b19eaa7a53bce222dfc93ab61dd31f9/src/hotspot/share/classfile/classFileParser.cpp#L6293

Good catch, I agree.

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

PR Review Comment: 
https://git.openjdk.org/valhalla/pull/1966#discussion_r2727314938

Reply via email to