S390: [Interpreter] Fix incorrect frame walking in arguments create stubs

S390: [Interpreter] Fix incorrect frame walking in arguments create stubs

Port 40f345416f00761c79b9d2094c2e12e798329935

Original commit message:

    The previous approach taken by FastNew[Sloppy,Strict,Rest]ArgumentsStub
    looked at the function slot in order to skip stub frames
    and find the JS frame. However, stub frames do not have a
    function slot (in fact their fixed frame ends one slot
    before the JS frame's function slot). Therefore, if this
    location in the stub frame happens to have the function
    object the create arguments stubs won't skip this frame
    correctly.

    Replace this approach with one where the stub is
    specialized to either skip a frame if required (since
    there will only ever be one extra frame on Ignition
    the loop approach isn't necessary).

R=rmcilroy@chromium.org, joransiu@ca.ibm.com, jyan@ca.ibm.com, michael_dawson@ca.ibm.com, mbrandy@us.ibm.com
BUG=

Committed: https://crrev.com/e7a234253ebd19e3a099d3f3929c9239d504d6b7
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#36252}

[john.yan, 2016-05-13 13:42:11]

PTAL

[john.yan, 2016-05-13 13:42:28]

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

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-05-13 13:42:40]

Dry run: CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1978823002/20001
View timeline at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-timeline/1978823002/20001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-05-13 14:12:09]

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

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-05-13 14:12:13]

Dry run: This issue passed the CQ dry run.

[JoranSiu, 2016-05-13 17:45:45]

On 2016/05/13 14:12:13, commit-bot: I haz the power wrote:
> Dry run: This issue passed the CQ dry run.

lgtm

[john.yan, 2016-05-13 18:06:46]

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

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-05-13 18:06:54]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1978823002/20001
View timeline at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-timeline/1978823002/20001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-05-13 18:08:43]

Committed patchset #2 (id:20001)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-05-13 18:10:29]

Description was changed from

==========
S390: [Interpreter] Fix incorrect frame walking in arguments create stubs

Port 40f345416f00761c79b9d2094c2e12e798329935

Original commit message:

    The previous approach taken by FastNew[Sloppy,Strict,Rest]ArgumentsStub
    looked at the function slot in order to skip stub frames
    and find the JS frame. However, stub frames do not have a
    function slot (in fact their fixed frame ends one slot
    before the JS frame's function slot). Therefore, if this
    location in the stub frame happens to have the function
    object the create arguments stubs won't skip this frame
    correctly.

    Replace this approach with one where the stub is
    specialized to either skip a frame if required (since
    there will only ever be one extra frame on Ignition
    the loop approach isn't necessary).

R=rmcilroy@chromium.org, joransiu@ca.ibm.com, jyan@ca.ibm.com,
michael_dawson@ca.ibm.com, mbrandy@us.ibm.com
BUG=
==========

to

==========
S390: [Interpreter] Fix incorrect frame walking in arguments create stubs

Port 40f345416f00761c79b9d2094c2e12e798329935

Original commit message:

    The previous approach taken by FastNew[Sloppy,Strict,Rest]ArgumentsStub
    looked at the function slot in order to skip stub frames
    and find the JS frame. However, stub frames do not have a
    function slot (in fact their fixed frame ends one slot
    before the JS frame's function slot). Therefore, if this
    location in the stub frame happens to have the function
    object the create arguments stubs won't skip this frame
    correctly.

    Replace this approach with one where the stub is
    specialized to either skip a frame if required (since
    there will only ever be one extra frame on Ignition
    the loop approach isn't necessary).

R=rmcilroy@chromium.org, joransiu@ca.ibm.com, jyan@ca.ibm.com,
michael_dawson@ca.ibm.com, mbrandy@us.ibm.com
BUG=

Committed: https://crrev.com/e7a234253ebd19e3a099d3f3929c9239d504d6b7
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#36252}
==========

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-05-13 18:10:30]

Patchset 2 (id:??) landed as
https://crrev.com/e7a234253ebd19e3a099d3f3929c9239d504d6b7
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#36252}