RFR: 8065585: Change ShouldNotReachHere() to never return (original) (raw)

Stefan Karlsson stefan.karlsson at oracle.com
Wed Apr 15 14:30:30 UTC 2015

On 2015-04-15 14:09, Per Liden wrote:

Hi Stefan,

Nice cleanup!

Thanks, Per.

Some comments below.

On 2015-04-15 12:49, Stefan Karlsson wrote: Hi,

Today the it's possible for the code to return out from ShouldNotReachHere() calls. This sometimes forces us to add return statements and assignments to parts of the code where it they don't make sense. By telling the compiler that ShouldNotReachHere is a dead end, we can get rid of these unnecessary constructs. For example: 1) We could get rid of return statements after ShouldNotReachHere(): bool ismarked() { // actual code here // Execution path that "should not" happen. ShouldNotReachHere(); return false; } 2) The following code will actually use an uninitialized value today. The compiler will find this if we turn on -Wuninitialized. But if we change ShouldNotReachHere() to not return, the compiler will stop complaining because report(type) will never be called with an uninitialized value: int type; switch (value) { case TYPEOOP: type = 0; break; case TYPEKLASS: type = 1; break; default: ShouldNotReachHere(); } report(type)

The patch changes the following functions and defines to never return: - fatal(...) - ShouldNotCallThis() - ShouldNotReachHere() - reportvmoutofmemory(...) - vmexitoutofmemory(...) but leaves the following unchanged: - Unimplemented() - Untested(...) - guarantee(...) We might want to change the the behavior of Unimplemented() and Untested(...), but they are used a lot in compiler code, so I've not changed them for this patch. There has been request to leave guarantee(...) unchanged so that they can be turned off in production code. guarantee() should not have this attribute as it should be able to return.

Of course.

I had to change some instance of ShouldNotReachHere() in destructors, because the VS C++ compiler complained about potential memory leaks. http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~stefank/8065585/webrev.01/ https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8065585 Looks good, just a few minor suggestions: - NORETURNATTRIBUTE -> ATTRIBUTENORETURN, to better match the existing ATTRIBUTEPRINTF?

I've gone with your suggestion to rename the define and get rid of the macro function parameter.

- Make noreturnfunction() static and move it into debug.cpp?

Done.

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~stefank/8065585/webrev.02.delta/ http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~stefank/8065585/webrev.02/

Thanks, StefanK

cheers, /Per

More information about the hotspot-dev mailing list