Re: RFR: 8330171: Lazy W^X switch implementation

2024-04-13 Thread Andrew Haley
On Sat, 13 Apr 2024 18:16:21 GMT, Thomas Stuefe wrote: > I have one question, and I'm sorry if it has been answered before. How > expensive is changing the mode? Is it just a status variable in user-space > pthread lib? Or does it need a system call? > > In other words, how fine granular can

Re: RFR: 8330171: Lazy W^X switch implementation

2024-04-13 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Fri, 12 Apr 2024 14:40:05 GMT, Sergey Nazarkin wrote: > An alternative for preemptively switching the W^X thread mode on macOS with > an AArch64 CPU. This implementation triggers the switch in response to the > SIGBUS signal if the *si_addr* belongs to the CodeCache area. With this >

Integrated: 8329674: JvmtiEnvThreadState::reset_current_location function should use JvmtiHandshake

2024-04-13 Thread Serguei Spitsyn
On Thu, 4 Apr 2024 15:28:41 GMT, Serguei Spitsyn wrote: > The internal JVM TI JvmtiHandshake and JvmtiUnitedHandshakeClosure classes > were introduced in the JDK 22 to unify/simplify the JVM TI functions > supporting implementation of the virtual threads. This enhancement is to > refactor the

Re: RFR: 8329674: JvmtiEnvThreadState::reset_current_location function should use JvmtiHandshake [v4]

2024-04-13 Thread Serguei Spitsyn
> The internal JVM TI JvmtiHandshake and JvmtiUnitedHandshakeClosure classes > were introduced in the JDK 22 to unify/simplify the JVM TI functions > supporting implementation of the virtual threads. This enhancement is to > refactor the JVM TI internal functions >

Re: RFR: 8322043: HeapDumper should use parallel dump by default

2024-04-13 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Fri, 12 Apr 2024 18:50:37 GMT, Alex Menkov wrote: > > I am curious: what is the memory overhead for parallel mode, and (I am not > > familiar with the logic) how many threads are involved? Is the number of > > thread bounded? > > I ask because, especially for the OnOOM handling, we may