S390: [Atomics] Remove Atomics code stubs; use TF ops

S390: [Atomics] Remove Atomics code stubs; use TF ops

Port d412cfa26c18a6ef1f6c0e274ee51f3d834eab74

Original commit message:
    [Atomics] Remove Atomics code stubs; use TF ops

    Reland of (https://codereview.chromium.org/1891033002)

    This is a much cleaner solution, which won't require nearly as much
    architecture-specific code. Thanks bmeurer@!

R=binji@chromium.org, joransiu@ca.ibm.com, bjaideep@ca.ibm.com, michael_dawson@ca.ibm.com, mbrandy@us.ibm.com

BUG=v8:4614
LOG=N

Committed: https://crrev.com/fea4ddaaa8072a4703c3baa08fde00aaf6af00e9
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#35657}

[john.yan, 2016-04-19 19:29:24]

PTAL

[JoranSiu, 2016-04-19 21:02:49]

https://codereview.chromium.org/1897373003/diff/1/src/compiler/s390/code-gene...
File src/compiler/s390/code-generator-s390.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1897373003/diff/1/src/compiler/s390/code-gene...
src/compiler/s390/code-generator-s390.cc:1674: //
ASSEMBLE_ATOMIC_LOAD_INTEGER(lhz, lhzx);
Can we remove this unnecessary comment?

https://codereview.chromium.org/1897373003/diff/1/src/compiler/s390/code-gene...
src/compiler/s390/code-generator-s390.cc:1675: __ llgh(i.OutputRegister(),
i.MemoryOperand());
Should this be calling LoadLogicialHalfwordP (i.e. llh on 31-bit, llgh on
64-bit).

https://codereview.chromium.org/1897373003/diff/1/src/compiler/s390/code-gene...
src/compiler/s390/code-generator-s390.cc:1678: __ lgf(i.OutputRegister(),
i.MemoryOperand());
Should this be Load():  L on 31-bit, LGF on 64-bit?

[john.yan, 2016-04-20 03:56:57]

On 2016/04/19 21:02:49, JoranSiu wrote:
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/1897373003/diff/1/src/compiler/s390/code-gene...
> File src/compiler/s390/code-generator-s390.cc (right):
> 
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/1897373003/diff/1/src/compiler/s390/code-gene...
> src/compiler/s390/code-generator-s390.cc:1674: //
> ASSEMBLE_ATOMIC_LOAD_INTEGER(lhz, lhzx);
> Can we remove this unnecessary comment?
> 
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/1897373003/diff/1/src/compiler/s390/code-gene...
> src/compiler/s390/code-generator-s390.cc:1675: __ llgh(i.OutputRegister(),
> i.MemoryOperand());
> Should this be calling LoadLogicialHalfwordP (i.e. llh on 31-bit, llgh on
> 64-bit).
> 
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/1897373003/diff/1/src/compiler/s390/code-gene...
> src/compiler/s390/code-generator-s390.cc:1678: __ lgf(i.OutputRegister(),
> i.MemoryOperand());
> Should this be Load():  L on 31-bit, LGF on 64-bit?

Updated

[john.yan, 2016-04-20 03:57:09]

The CQ bit was checked by jyan@ca.ibm.com to run a CQ dry run

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-04-20 03:57:18]

Dry run: CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1897373003/20001
View timeline at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-timeline/1897373003/20001

[JoranSiu, 2016-04-20 04:04:06]

On 2016/04/20 03:57:18, commit-bot: I haz the power wrote:
> Dry run: CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
>  https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1897373003/20001
> View timeline at
>  https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-timeline/1897373003/20001

lgtm

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-04-20 04:16:23]

The CQ bit was unchecked by commit-bot@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-04-20 04:16:24]

Dry run: This issue passed the CQ dry run.

[john.yan, 2016-04-20 13:18:08]

The CQ bit was checked by jyan@ca.ibm.com

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-04-20 13:18:20]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1897373003/20001
View timeline at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-timeline/1897373003/20001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-04-20 13:20:01]

Committed patchset #2 (id:20001)

[nodir1, 2016-04-22 18:44:08]

Description was changed from

==========
S390: [Atomics] Remove Atomics code stubs; use TF ops

Port d412cfa26c18a6ef1f6c0e274ee51f3d834eab74

Original commit message:
    [Atomics] Remove Atomics code stubs; use TF ops

    Reland of (https://codereview.chromium.org/1891033002)

    This is a much cleaner solution, which won't require nearly as much
    architecture-specific code. Thanks bmeurer@!

R=binji@chromium.org, joransiu@ca.ibm.com, bjaideep@ca.ibm.com,
michael_dawson@ca.ibm.com, mbrandy@us.ibm.com

BUG=v8:4614
LOG=N
==========

to

==========
S390: [Atomics] Remove Atomics code stubs; use TF ops

Port d412cfa26c18a6ef1f6c0e274ee51f3d834eab74

Original commit message:
    [Atomics] Remove Atomics code stubs; use TF ops

    Reland of (https://codereview.chromium.org/1891033002)

    This is a much cleaner solution, which won't require nearly as much
    architecture-specific code. Thanks bmeurer@!

R=binji@chromium.org, joransiu@ca.ibm.com, bjaideep@ca.ibm.com,
michael_dawson@ca.ibm.com, mbrandy@us.ibm.com

BUG=v8:4614
LOG=N

Committed: https://crrev.com/fea4ddaaa8072a4703c3baa08fde00aaf6af00e9
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#35657}
==========

[nodir1, 2016-04-22 18:44:09]

Patchset 2 (id:??) landed as
https://crrev.com/fea4ddaaa8072a4703c3baa08fde00aaf6af00e9
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#35657}