commit ffc87076dda9878cb2cc098149bae441d38b9268
author Calin Juravle <calin@google.com> Wed Apr 20 14:22:09 2016 +0100
committer Calin Juravle <calin@google.com> Thu Apr 28 16:15:04 2016 +0100
tree e587208d6a8e62532792add3e1ace6b4e6d73e0f
parent 97cbc9206e9adc473a90650ebdb5d620f517ff04

Split profile recording from jit compilation

We still use ProfileInfo objects to record profile information. That
gives us the flexibility to add the inline caches in the future and the
convenience of the already implemented GC.

If UseJIT is false and SaveProfilingInfo true, we will only record the
ProfileInfo and never launch compilation tasks.

Bug: 27916886

(cherry picked from commit e5de54cfab5f14ba0b8ff25d8d60901c7021943f)

Change-Id: I68afc181d71447895fb12346c1806e99bcab1de2

compiler/optimizing/sharpening.cc

diff --git a/compiler/optimizing/sharpening.cc b/compiler/optimizing/sharpening.cc
index 7a1bb31..08bd35f 100644
--- a/compiler/optimizing/sharpening.cc
+++ b/compiler/optimizing/sharpening.cc
@@ -99,7 +99,7 @@
     if (direct_method != 0u) {  // Should we use a direct pointer to the method?
       // Note: For JIT, kDirectAddressWithFixup doesn't make sense at all and while
       // kDirectAddress would be fine for image methods, we don't support it at the moment.
-      DCHECK(!Runtime::Current()->UseJit());
+      DCHECK(!Runtime::Current()->UseJitCompilation());
       if (direct_method != static_cast<uintptr_t>(-1)) {  // Is the method pointer known now?
         method_load_kind = HInvokeStaticOrDirect::MethodLoadKind::kDirectAddress;
         method_load_data = direct_method;
@@ -109,7 +109,7 @@
     } else {  // Use dex cache.
       DCHECK_EQ(target_method.dex_file, &graph_->GetDexFile());
       if (use_pc_relative_instructions) {  // Can we use PC-relative access to the dex cache arrays?
-        DCHECK(!Runtime::Current()->UseJit());
+        DCHECK(!Runtime::Current()->UseJitCompilation());
         method_load_kind = HInvokeStaticOrDirect::MethodLoadKind::kDexCachePcRelative;
         DexCacheArraysLayout layout(GetInstructionSetPointerSize(codegen_->GetInstructionSet()),
                                     &graph_->GetDexFile());
@@ -121,7 +121,7 @@
     if (direct_code != 0u) {  // Should we use a direct pointer to the code?
       // Note: For JIT, kCallPCRelative and kCallDirectWithFixup don't make sense at all and
       // while kCallDirect would be fine for image methods, we don't support it at the moment.
-      DCHECK(!Runtime::Current()->UseJit());
+      DCHECK(!Runtime::Current()->UseJitCompilation());
       if (direct_code != static_cast<uintptr_t>(-1)) {  // Is the code pointer known now?
         code_ptr_location = HInvokeStaticOrDirect::CodePtrLocation::kCallDirect;
         direct_code_ptr = direct_code;
@@ -174,7 +174,7 @@
 
     if (compiler_driver_->IsBootImage()) {
       // Compiling boot image. Resolve the string and allocate it if needed.
-      DCHECK(!runtime->UseJit());
+      DCHECK(!runtime->UseJitCompilation());
       mirror::String* string = class_linker->ResolveString(dex_file, string_index, dex_cache);
       CHECK(string != nullptr);
       if (!compiler_driver_->GetSupportBootImageFixup()) {
@@ -187,7 +187,7 @@
             ? HLoadString::LoadKind::kBootImageLinkTimePcRelative
             : HLoadString::LoadKind::kBootImageLinkTimeAddress;
       }
-    } else if (runtime->UseJit()) {
+    } else if (runtime->UseJitCompilation()) {
       // TODO: Make sure we don't set the "compile PIC" flag for JIT as that's bogus.
       // DCHECK(!codegen_->GetCompilerOptions().GetCompilePic());
       mirror::String* string = dex_cache->GetResolvedString(string_index);