I noticed this code

http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk7/jdk7/hotspot/file/5bb91b0db2c9/src/share/vm/opto/parse3.cpp
410 void Parse::do_multianewarray() {
411 int ndimensions = iter().get_dimensions();
412
413 // the m-dimensional array
414 bool will_link;
415 ciArrayKlass* array_klass = iter().get_klass(will_link)->as_array_klass();
416 assert(will_link, "multianewarray: typeflow responsibility");
417
418 // Note: Array classes are always initialized; no is_initialized check.
419
420 enum { MAX_DIMENSION = 5 };
421 if (ndimensions > MAX_DIMENSION || ndimensions <= 0) {
  !! 422 uncommon_trap(Deoptimization::Reason_unhandled,
423 Deoptimization::Action_none);
424 return;
425 }
....
507 }

and tried writing a test program that used an array with 6 dimensions and compared it to the same test using an array with 5 dimensions. The results were surprising. First the test with an array of 5 dimensions

        $ $Deployed/solaris-i586/JDK-7_b145/bin/javac MultiNewArray5.java
        $ $Deployed/solaris-i586/JDK-7_b145/bin/java -Xint MultiNewArray5
        That took 6.010 seconds.
        $ $Deployed/solaris-i586/JDK-7_b145/bin/java -client MultiNewArray5
        That took 3.048 seconds.
        $ $Deployed/solaris-i586/JDK-7_b145/bin/java -server MultiNewArray5
        That took 0.124 seconds.

So far so good. But when I try an array with 6 dimensions

        $ $Deployed/solaris-i586/JDK-7_b145/bin/javac MultiNewArray6.java
        $ $Deployed/solaris-i586/JDK-7_b145/bin/java -Xint MultiNewArray6
        That took 6.645 seconds.
        $ $Deployed/solaris-i586/JDK-7_b145/bin/java -client MultiNewArray6
        That took 3.537 seconds.
        $ $Deployed/solaris-i586/JDK-7_b145/bin/java -server MultiNewArray6
        That took 63.718 seconds.

The uncommon trap causes the server code to run 10x slower than the interpreter, and 18x slower than the interpreter. Wouldn't it be better to bail out of the compilation and mark the method as uncompilable so that it runs in the interpreter (or with the tier 1 client compilation)?

I've attached the MultiNewArray6.java (derived from a random number generator I was testing). The change to MultiNewArray5.java is to delete one dimension of the array, and change the name of the classes from *6 to *5.