8386578: double_keccak stub does not set its return value on x86

[missa-prime]

This change ensures that the x86-64 double_keccak intrinsic provides a consistent return value. The missing return value bug is already fixed in main by JDK-8384353. Now, callers like those in ML_DSA.java and ML_KEM.java will be able to make use of the return value.

---

• I confirm that I make this contribution in accordance with the OpenJDK Interim AI Policy.

---

Progress

• Change must be properly reviewed (1 review required, with at least 1 Reviewer)
• Change must not contain extraneous whitespace
• Commit message must refer to an issue
• JDK-8386578 needs maintainer approval

Issue

• JDK-8386578: double_keccak stub does not set its return value on x86 (Bug - P4 - Approved)

Reviewers

• Martin Doerr (@TheRealMDoerr - Reviewer)
• Volodymyr Paprotski (@vpaprotsk - no project role)

Reviewing

Using git

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk25u-dev.git pull/616/head:pull/616
$ git checkout pull/616

Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/616
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.org/jdk25u-dev.git pull/616/head

Using Skara CLI tools

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 616

View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 616

Using diff file

Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.org/jdk25u-dev/pull/616.diff

Using Webrev

Link to Webrev Comment

[bridgekeeper]

👋 Welcome back missa! A progress list of the required criteria for merging this PR into master will be added to the body of your pull request. There are additional pull request commands available for use with this pull request.

[openjdk]

@missa-prime This change now passes all automated pre-integration checks.

ℹ️ This project also has non-automated pre-integration requirements. Please see the file CONTRIBUTING.md for details.

After integration, the commit message for the final commit will be:

8386578: double_keccak stub does not set its return value on x86

Reviewed-by: mdoerr, vpaprotski

You can use pull request commands such as /summary, /contributor and /issue to adjust it as needed.

At the time when this comment was updated there had been 5 new commits pushed to the master branch:

• 653ff49: 8376355: Update to use jtreg 8.2.1
• 15629b7: 8369488: Update to use jtreg 8.1
• 5803dd3: 8376400: C2: folding ifs may cause incorrect execution when trap is taken
• ... and 2 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk25u-dev/compare/3674bc68738994877ee9389c8849e1481e4c008c...master

As there are no conflicts, your changes will automatically be rebased on top of these commits when integrating. If you prefer to avoid this automatic rebasing, please check the documentation for the /integrate command for further details.

As you do not have Committer status in this project an existing Committer must agree to sponsor your change. Possible candidates are the reviewers of this PR (@TheRealMDoerr) but any other Committer may sponsor as well.

➡️ To flag this PR as ready for integration with the above commit message, type /integrate in a new comment. (Afterwards, your sponsor types /sponsor in a new comment to perform the integration).

[openjdk]

This backport pull request has now been updated with the original issue, but not the original commit. If you have the original commit hash, please update the pull request title with Backport <hash>.

[missa-prime]

@vpaprotsk @TheRealMDoerr Please review when you get a chance. I'll ask for maintainer approval afterwards.

[mlbridge]

Webrevs

• 00: Full (04f1b1cf)

[TheRealMDoerr]

Looks reasonable. Thank you for fixing it!

[openjdk]

⚠️ @missa-prime This change is now ready for you to apply for maintainer approval. This can be done directly in each associated issue or by using the /approval command.

[vpaprotsk]

Looks good to me

[GoeLin]

Hi @missa-prime
thanks for preparing this.
If there is a test, you might want to contribute it to head as a follow-up change?