3789983e89
Reviewed-by: darcy, ihse
147 lines
6.0 KiB
Java
147 lines
6.0 KiB
Java
/*
|
|
* Copyright (c) 2017, Oracle and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.
|
|
* DO NOT ALTER OR REMOVE COPYRIGHT NOTICES OR THIS FILE HEADER.
|
|
*
|
|
* This code is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it
|
|
* under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 2 only, as
|
|
* published by the Free Software Foundation.
|
|
*
|
|
* This code is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, but WITHOUT
|
|
* ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of MERCHANTABILITY or
|
|
* FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the GNU General Public License
|
|
* version 2 for more details (a copy is included in the LICENSE file that
|
|
* accompanied this code).
|
|
*
|
|
* You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License version
|
|
* 2 along with this work; if not, write to the Free Software Foundation,
|
|
* Inc., 51 Franklin St, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA 02110-1301 USA.
|
|
*
|
|
* Please contact Oracle, 500 Oracle Parkway, Redwood Shores, CA 94065 USA
|
|
* or visit www.oracle.com if you need additional information or have any
|
|
* questions.
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
/*
|
|
* @test
|
|
* @bug 8078262 8177095
|
|
* @summary Tests correct dominator information after loop peeling.
|
|
*
|
|
* @run main/othervm -Xcomp
|
|
* -XX:CompileCommand=compileonly,compiler.loopopts.TestLoopPeeling::test*
|
|
* compiler.loopopts.TestLoopPeeling
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
package compiler.loopopts;
|
|
|
|
public class TestLoopPeeling {
|
|
|
|
public int[] array = new int[100];
|
|
|
|
public static void main(String args[]) {
|
|
TestLoopPeeling test = new TestLoopPeeling();
|
|
try {
|
|
test.testArrayAccess1(0, 1);
|
|
test.testArrayAccess2(0);
|
|
test.testArrayAccess3(0, false);
|
|
test.testArrayAllocation(0, 1);
|
|
} catch (Exception e) {
|
|
// Ignore exceptions
|
|
}
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
public void testArrayAccess1(int index, int inc) {
|
|
int storeIndex = -1;
|
|
|
|
for (; index < 10; index += inc) {
|
|
// This loop invariant check triggers loop peeling because it can
|
|
// be moved out of the loop (see 'IdealLoopTree::policy_peeling').
|
|
if (inc == 42) return;
|
|
|
|
// This loop variant usage of LShiftL( ConvI2L( Phi(storeIndex) ) )
|
|
// prevents the split if optimization that would otherwise clone the
|
|
// LShiftL and ConvI2L nodes and assign them to their corresponding array
|
|
// address computation (see 'PhaseIdealLoop::split_if_with_blocks_post').
|
|
if (storeIndex > 0 && array[storeIndex] == 42) return;
|
|
|
|
if (index == 42) {
|
|
// This store and the corresponding range check are moved out of the
|
|
// loop and both used after main loop and the peeled iteration exit.
|
|
// For the peeled iteration, storeIndex is always -1 and the ConvI2L
|
|
// is replaced by TOP. However, the range check is not folded because
|
|
// we don't do the split if optimization in PhaseIdealLoop2.
|
|
// As a result, we have a (dead) control path from the peeled iteration
|
|
// to the StoreI but the data path is removed.
|
|
array[storeIndex] = 1;
|
|
return;
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
storeIndex++;
|
|
}
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
public int testArrayAccess2(int index) {
|
|
// Load1 and the corresponding range check are moved out of the loop
|
|
// and both are used after the main loop and the peeled iteration exit.
|
|
// For the peeled iteration, storeIndex is always Integer.MIN_VALUE and
|
|
// for the main loop it is 0. Hence, the merging phi has type int:<=0.
|
|
// Load1 reads the array at index ConvI2L(CastII(AddI(storeIndex, -1)))
|
|
// where the CastII is range check dependent and has type int:>=0.
|
|
// The CastII gets pushed through the AddI and its type is changed to int:>=1
|
|
// which does not overlap with the input type of storeIndex (int:<=0).
|
|
// The CastII is replaced by TOP causing a cascade of other eliminations.
|
|
// Since the control path through the range check CmpU(AddI(storeIndex, -1))
|
|
// is not eliminated, the graph is in a corrupted state. We fail once we merge
|
|
// with the result of Load2 because we get data from a non-dominating region.
|
|
int storeIndex = Integer.MIN_VALUE;
|
|
for (; index < 10; ++index) {
|
|
if (index == 42) {
|
|
return array[storeIndex-1]; // Load1
|
|
}
|
|
storeIndex = 0;
|
|
}
|
|
return array[42]; // Load2
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
public int testArrayAccess3(int index, boolean b) {
|
|
// Same as testArrayAccess2 but manifests as crash in register allocator.
|
|
int storeIndex = Integer.MIN_VALUE;
|
|
for (; index < 10; ++index) {
|
|
if (b) {
|
|
return 0;
|
|
}
|
|
if (index == 42) {
|
|
return array[storeIndex-1]; // Load1
|
|
}
|
|
storeIndex = 0;
|
|
}
|
|
return array[42]; // Load2
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
public byte[] testArrayAllocation(int index, int inc) {
|
|
int allocationCount = -1;
|
|
byte[] result;
|
|
|
|
for (; index < 10; index += inc) {
|
|
// This loop invariant check triggers loop peeling because it can
|
|
// be moved out of the loop (see 'IdealLoopTree::policy_peeling').
|
|
if (inc == 42) return null;
|
|
|
|
if (index == 42) {
|
|
// This allocation and the corresponding size check are moved out of the
|
|
// loop and both used after main loop and the peeled iteration exit.
|
|
// For the peeled iteration, allocationCount is always -1 and the ConvI2L
|
|
// is replaced by TOP. However, the size check is not folded because
|
|
// we don't do the split if optimization in PhaseIdealLoop2.
|
|
// As a result, we have a (dead) control path from the peeled iteration
|
|
// to the allocation but the data path is removed.
|
|
result = new byte[allocationCount];
|
|
return result;
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
allocationCount++;
|
|
}
|
|
return null;
|
|
}
|
|
}
|
|
|