-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 767
Fix array and memory segment access in VectorAPIExpansion #20553
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Conversation
gita-omr
commented
Nov 8, 2024
- we should not add array header to the address but use base address and offset provided by the intrinsic, whether it's array or segment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The approach makes sense to me. @0xdaryl Please review this
@@ -1267,6 +1267,13 @@ TR_VectorAPIExpansion::generateAddressNode(TR::Compilation *comp, TR::Node *arra | |||
return aladdNode; | |||
} | |||
|
|||
TR::Node * | |||
TR_VectorAPIExpansion::generateAddressNode(TR::Compilation *comp, TR::Node *base, TR::Node *offset) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The compilation object is not used in this function. Does it need to be part of the API?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Right. I will remove it.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Done.
Jenkins test sanity all jdk21 |
jdk_utik_0 failure on Z seems to be unrelated. |
Please squash commits and we can merge. |
- we should not add array header to the address but use base address and offset provided by the intrinsic, whether it's array or segment
Squashed. Thanks! |