Clean up references to old opcodes #20588
Conversation
|
@hzongaro May I ask you to review this change? Thank you! |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I did a quick grep through the code, and I didn't spot any other references to isstore or isload, except those that are actually describing whether something is a store or is a load. Thank you for cleaning up those remaining uses!
May I ask you to correct the commit comment? It mentions idload, idstore, ifload and ifstore, but none of them actually appear in this commit.
The old opcodes had the letter i as a prefix if the operation was indirect. Those opcodes were renamed to use the letter i as a suffix instead. This commit cleans up the references to the old opcodes, from isload/isstore to sloadi/sstorei Related: eclipse-openj9#19489 Signed-off-by: Annabelle Huo <[email protected]>
a7ehuo
force-pushed
the
techdebt-cleanup-opcode-comments-5
branch
from
19a53ff to
cec7421
Compare
Whoops, I just reused the commit comments from the OMR one. Updated the commit message in cec7421. Ready for another review. Thanks! |
|
Jenkins test sanity.functional xlinux jdk17 |
|
Looks like testing might have timed out. Rerunning. . . . Jenkins test sanity.functional xlinux jdk17 |
The old opcodes had the letter i as a prefix if the operation was indirect. Those opcodes were renamed to use the letter i as a suffix instead.
This commit cleans up the references to the old opcodes from isload/isstore to sloadi/sstorei
Related: #19489