Re: RFR : 8221696: MappedByteBuffer.force method to specify range

On 16/05/2019 14:14, Alan Bateman wrote: > Mikael's suggestion seem okay. This is under the hood implementation so > doesn't matter if there is a follow-on issue or you include it in the > bigger patch. It might be easier to do the former while it's fresh in > our minds. Indeed. I have raised

Re: RFR : 8221696: MappedByteBuffer.force method to specify range

On 14/05/2019 09:00, Andrew Dinn wrote: Hi Mikael, Thanks for looking at this. On 13/05/2019 17:41, Mikael Vidstedt wrote: Would it be worth putting the logic in an aptly named (private) method? Something like: ... private long alignDown(long address, long alignment) {     return

Re: RFR : 8221696: MappedByteBuffer.force method to specify range

On 14/05/2019 10:57, Andrew Haley wrote: > On 5/13/19 5:14 PM, Andrew Dinn wrote: >> Thank you for looking at the patch. >> . . . >>firstly, that ps-1 clears the original bit and sets all lower bits; > > I think your core argument fails at this point. You have *already* > moved to considering

Re: RFR : 8221696: MappedByteBuffer.force method to specify range

On 5/13/19 5:14 PM, Andrew Dinn wrote: > Thank you for looking at the patch. > > On 28/04/2019 18:09, Andrew Haley wrote: >> On 4/25/19 5:34 PM, Andrew Dinn wrote: >>>long map_base = (address & ~(ps - 1)); >> >> This looks like a hard way to write >> >>long map_base = address & -ps; > >

Re: RFR : 8221696: MappedByteBuffer.force method to specify range

Hi Mikael, Thanks for looking at this. On 13/05/2019 17:41, Mikael Vidstedt wrote: Would it be worth putting the logic in an aptly named (private) method? Something like: ... private long alignDown(long address, long alignment) { return address & ; } ... long mapBase =

Re: RFR : 8221696: MappedByteBuffer.force method to specify range

On 26/04/2019 15:46, Alan Bateman wrote: On 25/04/2019 17:34, Andrew Dinn wrote: Also, here is a new webrev including the updated implementations for mappingAddress/Offset/Length as described below JIRA:   https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8221696 webrev:

Re: RFR : 8221696: MappedByteBuffer.force method to specify range

Would it be worth putting the logic in an aptly named (private) method? Something like: ... private long alignDown(long address, long alignment) { return address & ; } ... long mapBase = alignDown(address, ps); … Cheers, Mikael > On May 13, 2019, at 9:14 AM, Andrew Dinn wrote: > >

Re: RFR : 8221696: MappedByteBuffer.force method to specify range

Thank you for looking at the patch. On 28/04/2019 18:09, Andrew Haley wrote: On 4/25/19 5:34 PM, Andrew Dinn wrote: long map_base = (address & ~(ps - 1)); This looks like a hard way to write long map_base = address & -ps; My version certainly uses more characters, that is for sure.

Re: RFR : 8221696: MappedByteBuffer.force method to specify range

On 4/25/19 5:34 PM, Andrew Dinn wrote: > long map_base = (address & ~(ps - 1)); This looks like a hard way to write long map_base = address & -ps; -- Andrew Haley Java Platform Lead Engineer Red Hat UK Ltd. EAC8 43EB D3EF DB98 CC77 2FAD A5CD 6035 332F A671

Re: RFR : 8221696: MappedByteBuffer.force method to specify range

On 25/04/2019 17:34, Andrew Dinn wrote: Also, here is a new webrev including the updated implementations for mappingAddress/Offset/Length as described below JIRA: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8221696 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~adinn/8221696/webrev.02 This looks right and

Re: RFR : 8221696: MappedByteBuffer.force method to specify range

Also, here is a new webrev including the updated implementations for mappingAddress/Offset/Length as described below JIRA: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8221696 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~adinn/8221696/webrev.02 regards, Andrew Dinn --- On 23/04/2019 17:15, Andrew

Re: RFR : 8221696: MappedByteBuffer.force method to specify range

Hi Alan, Thanks for looking at this. On 22/04/2019 16:52, Alan Bateman wrote: > The calculation to compute the page aligned address and then the > distance from there to the end of the region is tricky to get right. I > think you have it right, I'm just wondering if we could leverage the >

Re: RFR : 8221696: MappedByteBuffer.force method to specify range

On 18/04/2019 10:17, Andrew Dinn wrote: Hi Alan, The CSR for this issue has been finalized and is awaiting approval. Would it now be possible to proceed with reviews of the implementation? JIRA: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8221696 webrev:

Re: RFR : 8221696: MappedByteBuffer.force method to specify range

Hi Alan, The CSR for this issue has been finalized and is awaiting approval. Would it now be possible to proceed with reviews of the implementation? JIRA: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8221696 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~adinn/8221696/webrev.01 regards, Andrew Dinn

Re: RFR : 8221696: MappedByteBuffer.force method to specify range

On 11/04/2019 11:34, Alan Bateman wrote: > On 10/04/2019 12:15, Andrew Dinn wrote: >> : >> An updated webrev is available: >> >> JIRA:   https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8221696 >> webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~adinn/8221696/webrev.01 >> >> > The updated javadoc looks good. A minor

Re: RFR : 8221696: MappedByteBuffer.force method to specify range

On 10/04/2019 12:15, Andrew Dinn wrote: : An updated webrev is available: JIRA: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8221696 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~adinn/8221696/webrev.01 The updated javadoc looks good. A minor nit is that it reads "and includes {@code length} bytes" when

Re: RFR : 8221696: MappedByteBuffer.force method to specify range

On 09/04/2019 18:59, Alan Bateman wrote: > There are a couple of implementation details to discuss but I'll stick > to the API/javadoc for now so that you can create the CSR. Ok, thanks. > We discussed the method signature, parameter types, and the semantics in > previous mails so I think they

Re: RFR : 8221696: MappedByteBuffer.force method to specify range

On 09/04/2019 19:15, Brian Burkhalter wrote: > >> On Apr 9, 2019, at 10:59 AM, Alan Bateman > > wrote: >> >> There are a couple of implementation details to discuss > > I was wondering whether this topic has any synergy / overlap with this > prior thread [1] the

Re: RFR : 8221696: MappedByteBuffer.force method to specify range

On 09/04/2019 19:30, Andrew Haley wrote: > On 4/9/19 11:42 AM, Andrew Dinn wrote: >> This new API method was conceived as a preliminary change for JEP 352 to >> allow selective writeback of NVRAM-backed buffers. However, it has been >> implemented to provide a similar capability for file-mapped

Re: RFR : 8221696: MappedByteBuffer.force method to specify range

On 4/9/19 11:42 AM, Andrew Dinn wrote: > This new API method was conceived as a preliminary change for JEP 352 to > allow selective writeback of NVRAM-backed buffers. However, it has been > implemented to provide a similar capability for file-mapped byte > buffers. The old brute-force API method,

Re: RFR : 8221696: MappedByteBuffer.force method to specify range

> On Apr 9, 2019, at 10:59 AM, Alan Bateman wrote: > > There are a couple of implementation details to discuss I was wondering whether this topic has any synergy / overlap with this prior thread [1] the principal sticking point of which was IIRC forcing / loading a slice of a MBB. Brian

Re: RFR : 8221696: MappedByteBuffer.force method to specify range

On 09/04/2019 11:42, Andrew Dinn wrote: Could I please get reviews for the following patch which overloads MappedByteBuffer.force to accept a start offset and length. JIRA: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8221696 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~adinn/8221696/webrev.00 This new

Re: RFR : 8221696: MappedByteBuffer.force method to specify range

On 09/04/2019 16:04, Daniel Fuchs wrote: > . . . > That reads fine, thanks! Good. Thanks for reviewing this. > BTW: I haven't really looked at the implementation, I'm leaving that to > the experts of the field :-) No problem. I await their expert judgement. regards, Andrew Dinn ---

Re: RFR : 8221696: MappedByteBuffer.force method to specify range

Hi Andrew, On 09/04/2019 13:37, Andrew Dinn wrote: I am not sure that this needs to be mentioned in an implNote. It is of the nature of most memory-mapped storage devices that writeback has a minimum granularity well above byte level. Would you be ok with a correspondingly general caveat? For

Re: RFR : 8221696: MappedByteBuffer.force method to specify range

Hi Daniel, Thanks for looking at this. On 09/04/2019 12:28, Daniel Fuchs wrote: > Hi Andrew, > > On 09/04/2019 11:42, Andrew Dinn wrote: >> One detail that is worth highlighting is that for file-backed buffers >> the start address passed to the native method force0 is rounded down to >> a page

Re: RFR : 8221696: MappedByteBuffer.force method to specify range

Hi Andrew, On 09/04/2019 11:42, Andrew Dinn wrote: One detail that is worth highlighting is that for file-backed buffers the start address passed to the native method force0 is rounded down to a page boundary. This is needed for Unix implementations to ensure that the underlying msync system

RFR : 8221696: MappedByteBuffer.force method to specify range

Could I please get reviews for the following patch which overloads MappedByteBuffer.force to accept a start offset and length. JIRA: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8221696 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~adinn/8221696/webrev.00 This new API method was conceived as a preliminary