On Tue, 20 May 2025 22:14:42 GMT, Kim Barrett <kbarr...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/ref/Reference.java line 366: >> >>> 364: >>> 365: /* Implementation of unintrinsified get(). Making get() native >>> may lead >>> 366: * C2 to sometimes prefer the native implementation over the >>> intrinsic. >> >> Can you share more details on this? > > See review thread slightly above here, specifically > https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/24315/files#r2094884157. > I've looked at the intrinsics for Object.clone() and Object.hashCode(), but > only enough to decide I > understand the approach being taken here better than what's in those. As I understand, `JDK-8271862` was about migrating to non-virtual intrinsic method. In case of `Reference::get()`, you already have a virtual public method marked as `@IntrinsicCandidate`. And the patch doesn't change anything there. So, unless I miss something, I believe the comment is misleading. ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/24315#discussion_r2105506789
