Alright, we can abandon this change. In practice, tests on different
platforms will usually catch SOE before users encounter it, because the
stacks are all almost identical. Unless there is e.g. a hotspot bug that
causes thread local variables to be allocated inside the stack size instead
of outs
So doing a bit of homework should probably have been my first approach.
Interestingly, we are never actually going to have only 32k allocated
for the stack. The VM will allocate the
os::Solaris|Linux|etc::min_stack_allowed size which is a minimum of 48k
on some platforms but generally 64k+. Wi
The fear is that stack sizes and alignments have grown over time, and
thread stacks are acquiring things like guard pages, and those pages may
(incorrectly) end up getting included in the stack size. I'm particularly
afraid of the hotspot guard page code.
It may be worthwhile seeing how low you c
I have not made any empirical measurements. I was following up on
Martins suggestion. I'll try to put some time aside for testing later
this week though.
-Rob
On 15/07/14 18:51, roger riggs wrote:
Hi Rob,
Is there any evidence that needs more space? Is there any way to tell
how much of
Hi Martin,
Wait a minute, can you provide more motivation, observation. etc.
it really does not seem necessary and just because everything is bigger
is pretty weak.
Thanks, Roger
On 7/15/2014 1:48 PM, Martin Buchholz wrote:
Looks good to me!
On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 10:46 AM, Rob McKenna
And as in that review you have managed to intercept me before I made a
small correction. In this case to the subject.
I'm beginning to suspect you're a highly sophisticated bot.
-Rob
On 15/07/14 18:48, Martin Buchholz wrote:
Looks good to me!
On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 10:46 AM, Rob McKenn
Hi Rob,
Is there any evidence that needs more space? Is there any way to tell
how much of
the existing 32k is being used?
The reaper has very limited processing to do and there is one thread for
every process spawned.
Roger
On 7/15/2014 1:46 PM, Rob McKenna wrote:
Hi folks,
A very simpl
Looks good to me!
On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 10:46 AM, Rob McKenna
wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> A very simple change suggested by Martin a while back in another review.
> I'm just getting around to it now:
>
> bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8050044
> webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ro
Hi folks,
A very simple change suggested by Martin a while back in another review.
I'm just getting around to it now:
bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8050044
webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~robm/8050044/webrev.01/
Martins comments:
http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/cor