On Tue, 23 Jul 2024 13:12:23 GMT, Coleen Phillimore wrote:
>> src/hotspot/share/runtime/deoptimization.cpp line 1641:
>>
>>> 1639: assert(fr.is_deoptimized_frame(), "frame must be
>>> scheduled for deoptimization");
>>> 1640: if (LockingMode == LM_LEGACY) {
>>>
On Thu, 18 Jul 2024 11:30:27 GMT, Roman Kennke wrote:
>> Axel Boldt-Christmas has updated the pull request incrementally with 10
>> additional commits since the last revision:
>>
>> - Remove try_read
>> - Add explicit to single parameter constructors
>> - Remove superfluous access specifier
On Wed, 17 Jul 2024 06:40:31 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
>> src/hotspot/share/runtime/basicLock.hpp line 46:
>>
>>> 44: // Used as a cache the ObjectMonitor* used when locking. Must either
>>> 45: // be nullptr or the ObjectMonitor* used when locking.
>>> 46: volatile uintptr_t _metadata;
>>
On Wed, 17 Jul 2024 06:35:34 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
>> Axel Boldt-Christmas has updated the pull request incrementally with 10
>> additional commits since the last revision:
>>
>> - Remove try_read
>> - Add explicit to single parameter constructors
>> - Remove superfluous access specifier
On Mon, 15 Jul 2024 00:44:31 GMT, Axel Boldt-Christmas
wrote:
>> src/hotspot/share/runtime/basicLock.cpp line 37:
>>
>>> 35: if (mon != nullptr) {
>>> 36: mon->print_on(st);
>>> 37: }
>>
>> I am not sure if we wanted to do this, but we know the owner, therefore we
>> could also
On Tue, 23 Jul 2024 12:34:45 GMT, Coleen Phillimore wrote:
>> I was thinking it was referring to `ObjectSynchronizer::waitUninterruptibly`
>> added the same commit as the comment b3bf31a0a08da679ec2fd21613243fb17b1135a9
>
> git backout restored the old wrong comment. We should fix this
On Mon, 15 Jul 2024 00:50:30 GMT, Axel Boldt-Christmas
wrote:
>> When inflating a monitor the `ObjectMonitor*` is written directly over the
>> `markWord` and any overwritten data is displaced into a displaced
>> `markWord`. This is problematic for concurrent GCs which needs extra care or
>>
On Mon, 15 Jul 2024 00:44:02 GMT, Axel Boldt-Christmas
wrote:
>> src/hotspot/share/oops/instanceKlass.cpp line 1090:
>>
>>> 1088:
>>> 1089: // Step 2
>>> 1090: // If we were to use wait() instead of waitUninterruptibly() then
>>
>> This is a nice correction (even though, the actual
On Mon, 15 Jul 2024 00:50:30 GMT, Axel Boldt-Christmas
wrote:
>> When inflating a monitor the `ObjectMonitor*` is written directly over the
>> `markWord` and any overwritten data is displaced into a displaced
>> `markWord`. This is problematic for concurrent GCs which needs extra care or
>>
On Mon, 15 Jul 2024 00:50:30 GMT, Axel Boldt-Christmas
wrote:
>> When inflating a monitor the `ObjectMonitor*` is written directly over the
>> `markWord` and any overwritten data is displaced into a displaced
>> `markWord`. This is problematic for concurrent GCs which needs extra care or
>>
On Mon, 15 Jul 2024 00:50:30 GMT, Axel Boldt-Christmas
wrote:
>> When inflating a monitor the `ObjectMonitor*` is written directly over the
>> `markWord` and any overwritten data is displaced into a displaced
>> `markWord`. This is problematic for concurrent GCs which needs extra care or
>>
On Mon, 15 Jul 2024 00:50:30 GMT, Axel Boldt-Christmas
wrote:
>> When inflating a monitor the `ObjectMonitor*` is written directly over the
>> `markWord` and any overwritten data is displaced into a displaced
>> `markWord`. This is problematic for concurrent GCs which needs extra care or
>>
On Mon, 15 Jul 2024 00:50:30 GMT, Axel Boldt-Christmas
wrote:
>> When inflating a monitor the `ObjectMonitor*` is written directly over the
>> `markWord` and any overwritten data is displaced into a displaced
>> `markWord`. This is problematic for concurrent GCs which needs extra care or
>>
On Wed, 17 Jul 2024 06:39:14 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
>> Axel Boldt-Christmas has updated the pull request incrementally with 10
>> additional commits since the last revision:
>>
>> - Remove try_read
>> - Add explicit to single parameter constructors
>> - Remove superfluous access specifier
On Mon, 15 Jul 2024 00:50:30 GMT, Axel Boldt-Christmas
wrote:
>> When inflating a monitor the `ObjectMonitor*` is written directly over the
>> `markWord` and any overwritten data is displaced into a displaced
>> `markWord`. This is problematic for concurrent GCs which needs extra care or
>>
On Mon, 15 Jul 2024 00:50:30 GMT, Axel Boldt-Christmas
wrote:
>> When inflating a monitor the `ObjectMonitor*` is written directly over the
>> `markWord` and any overwritten data is displaced into a displaced
>> `markWord`. This is problematic for concurrent GCs which needs extra care or
>>
On Tue, 16 Jul 2024 12:37:43 GMT, Roman Kennke wrote:
>> Axel Boldt-Christmas has updated the pull request incrementally with 10
>> additional commits since the last revision:
>>
>> - Remove try_read
>> - Add explicit to single parameter constructors
>> - Remove superfluous access specifier
On Mon, 15 Jul 2024 00:50:30 GMT, Axel Boldt-Christmas
wrote:
>> When inflating a monitor the `ObjectMonitor*` is written directly over the
>> `markWord` and any overwritten data is displaced into a displaced
>> `markWord`. This is problematic for concurrent GCs which needs extra care or
>>
On Fri, 12 Jul 2024 11:09:35 GMT, Roman Kennke wrote:
>> Axel Boldt-Christmas has updated the pull request incrementally with one
>> additional commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Update arguments.cpp
>
> src/hotspot/share/oops/instanceKlass.cpp line 1090:
>
>> 1088:
>> 1089: // Step
> When inflating a monitor the `ObjectMonitor*` is written directly over the
> `markWord` and any overwritten data is displaced into a displaced `markWord`.
> This is problematic for concurrent GCs which needs extra care or looser
> semantics to use this displaced data. In Lilliput this data
On Fri, 12 Jul 2024 15:58:56 GMT, Roman Kennke wrote:
>> src/hotspot/share/runtime/synchronizer.cpp line 390:
>>
>>> 388:
>>> 389: static bool useHeavyMonitors() {
>>> 390: #if defined(X86) || defined(AARCH64) || defined(PPC64) ||
>>> defined(RISCV64) || defined(S390)
>>
>> Why are those
On Tue, 9 Jul 2024 20:43:06 GMT, Coleen Phillimore wrote:
>> Axel Boldt-Christmas has updated the pull request incrementally with two
>> additional commits since the last revision:
>>
>> - Add JVMCI symbol exports
>> - Revert "More graceful JVMCI VM option interaction"
>>
>>This
On Fri, 12 Jul 2024 15:56:59 GMT, Roman Kennke wrote:
>> Axel Boldt-Christmas has updated the pull request incrementally with one
>> additional commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Update arguments.cpp
>
> src/hotspot/share/runtime/synchronizer.cpp line 390:
>
>> 388:
>> 389: static bool
On Fri, 12 Jul 2024 05:57:30 GMT, Axel Boldt-Christmas
wrote:
>> When inflating a monitor the `ObjectMonitor*` is written directly over the
>> `markWord` and any overwritten data is displaced into a displaced
>> `markWord`. This is problematic for concurrent GCs which needs extra care or
>>
On Fri, 12 Jul 2024 12:06:05 GMT, Andrew Haley wrote:
>> src/hotspot/cpu/aarch64/c2_MacroAssembler_aarch64.cpp line 343:
>>
>>> 341: const Register t3_owner = t3;
>>> 342: const ByteSize monitor_tag = in_ByteSize(UseObjectMonitorTable ? 0
>>> : checked_cast(markWord::monitor_value));
> When inflating a monitor the `ObjectMonitor*` is written directly over the
> `markWord` and any overwritten data is displaced into a displaced `markWord`.
> This is problematic for concurrent GCs which needs extra care or looser
> semantics to use this displaced data. In Lilliput this data
On Fri, 12 Jul 2024 10:54:23 GMT, Axel Boldt-Christmas
wrote:
>> When inflating a monitor the `ObjectMonitor*` is written directly over the
>> `markWord` and any overwritten data is displaced into a displaced
>> `markWord`. This is problematic for concurrent GCs which needs extra care or
>>
On Fri, 12 Jul 2024 09:40:45 GMT, Roman Kennke wrote:
>> Axel Boldt-Christmas has updated the pull request incrementally with one
>> additional commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Update arguments.cpp
>
> src/hotspot/cpu/aarch64/c2_MacroAssembler_aarch64.cpp line 343:
>
>> 341: const
On Fri, 12 Jul 2024 09:53:11 GMT, Roman Kennke wrote:
> When you say 'This patch has been evaluated to be performance neutral when
> UseObjectMonitorTable is turned off (the default).' - what does the
> performance look like with +UOMT? How does it compare to -UOMT?
Most benchmarks are
On Fri, 12 Jul 2024 09:32:44 GMT, Roman Kennke wrote:
>> Axel Boldt-Christmas has updated the pull request incrementally with one
>> additional commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Update arguments.cpp
>
> src/hotspot/cpu/aarch64/c2_MacroAssembler_aarch64.cpp line 318:
>
>> 316:
>> 317:
> When inflating a monitor the `ObjectMonitor*` is written directly over the
> `markWord` and any overwritten data is displaced into a displaced `markWord`.
> This is problematic for concurrent GCs which needs extra care or looser
> semantics to use this displaced data. In Lilliput this data
On Fri, 12 Jul 2024 05:57:30 GMT, Axel Boldt-Christmas
wrote:
>> When inflating a monitor the `ObjectMonitor*` is written directly over the
>> `markWord` and any overwritten data is displaced into a displaced
>> `markWord`. This is problematic for concurrent GCs which needs extra care or
>>
On Fri, 12 Jul 2024 05:57:30 GMT, Axel Boldt-Christmas
wrote:
>> When inflating a monitor the `ObjectMonitor*` is written directly over the
>> `markWord` and any overwritten data is displaced into a displaced
>> `markWord`. This is problematic for concurrent GCs which needs extra care or
>>
> When inflating a monitor the `ObjectMonitor*` is written directly over the
> `markWord` and any overwritten data is displaced into a displaced `markWord`.
> This is problematic for concurrent GCs which needs extra care or looser
> semantics to use this displaced data. In Lilliput this data
On Wed, 10 Jul 2024 09:41:37 GMT, Axel Boldt-Christmas
wrote:
>> src/hotspot/share/runtime/lightweightSynchronizer.cpp line 763:
>>
>>> 761: assert(mark.has_monitor(), "must be");
>>> 762: // The monitor exists
>>> 763: ObjectMonitor* monitor = ObjectSynchronizer::read_monitor(current,
On Wed, 10 Jul 2024 09:41:08 GMT, Axel Boldt-Christmas
wrote:
>> src/hotspot/share/runtime/arguments.cpp line 1830:
>>
>>> 1828: FLAG_SET_CMDLINE(LockingMode, LM_LIGHTWEIGHT);
>>> 1829: warning("UseObjectMonitorTable requires LM_LIGHTWEIGHT");
>>> 1830: }
>>
>> Maybe we want this to
On Thu, 11 Jul 2024 09:25:52 GMT, Yudi Zheng wrote:
>> Axel Boldt-Christmas has updated the pull request incrementally with four
>> additional commits since the last revision:
>>
>> - Add extra comments in LightweightSynchronizer::inflate_fast_locked_object
>> - Fix typos
>> - Remove unused
On Wed, 10 Jul 2024 20:10:07 GMT, Axel Boldt-Christmas
wrote:
>> When inflating a monitor the `ObjectMonitor*` is written directly over the
>> `markWord` and any overwritten data is displaced into a displaced
>> `markWord`. This is problematic for concurrent GCs which needs extra care or
>>
> When inflating a monitor the `ObjectMonitor*` is written directly over the
> `markWord` and any overwritten data is displaced into a displaced `markWord`.
> This is problematic for concurrent GCs which needs extra care or looser
> semantics to use this displaced data. In Lilliput this data
On Tue, 9 Jul 2024 20:44:58 GMT, Coleen Phillimore wrote:
>> Axel Boldt-Christmas has updated the pull request incrementally with two
>> additional commits since the last revision:
>>
>> - Add JVMCI symbol exports
>> - Revert "More graceful JVMCI VM option interaction"
>>
>>This
> When inflating a monitor the `ObjectMonitor*` is written directly over the
> `markWord` and any overwritten data is displaced into a displaced `markWord`.
> This is problematic for concurrent GCs which needs extra care or looser
> semantics to use this displaced data. In Lilliput this data
On Mon, 8 Jul 2024 16:21:16 GMT, Axel Boldt-Christmas
wrote:
>> When inflating a monitor the `ObjectMonitor*` is written directly over the
>> `markWord` and any overwritten data is displaced into a displaced
>> `markWord`. This is problematic for concurrent GCs which needs extra care or
>>
> When inflating a monitor the `ObjectMonitor*` is written directly over the
> `markWord` and any overwritten data is displaced into a displaced `markWord`.
> This is problematic for concurrent GCs which needs extra care or looser
> semantics to use this displaced data. In Lilliput this data
On Mon, 8 Jul 2024 12:13:07 GMT, Axel Boldt-Christmas
wrote:
>> When inflating a monitor the `ObjectMonitor*` is written directly over the
>> `markWord` and any overwritten data is displaced into a displaced
>> `markWord`. This is problematic for concurrent GCs which needs extra care or
>>
On Mon, 8 Jul 2024 12:13:07 GMT, Axel Boldt-Christmas
wrote:
>> When inflating a monitor the `ObjectMonitor*` is written directly over the
>> `markWord` and any overwritten data is displaced into a displaced
>> `markWord`. This is problematic for concurrent GCs which needs extra care or
>>
> When inflating a monitor the `ObjectMonitor*` is written directly over the
> `markWord` and any overwritten data is displaced into a displaced `markWord`.
> This is problematic for concurrent GCs which needs extra care or looser
> semantics to use this displaced data. In Lilliput this data
On Mon, 8 Jul 2024 10:58:29 GMT, Thomas Wuerthinger wrote:
> OK. Will there be a CSR or JEP for this?
There is no plan for this, nor should it be required. It’s an internal
implementation.
> When do you approximately expect this to land in main line?
ASAP. Compatibility for the field name
On Mon, 8 Jul 2024 08:18:42 GMT, Axel Boldt-Christmas
wrote:
> When inflating a monitor the `ObjectMonitor*` is written directly over the
> `markWord` and any overwritten data is displaced into a displaced `markWord`.
> This is problematic for concurrent GCs which needs extra care or looser
On Mon, 8 Jul 2024 09:39:32 GMT, Thomas Wuerthinger wrote:
> Is this change expected to require JVMCI and/or Graal JIT changes?
Support for `UseObjectMonitorTable` would require changes to Graal JIT.
(`UseObjectMonitorTable` is off by default).
Minimal support would be to call into the VM for
On Mon, 8 Jul 2024 08:18:42 GMT, Axel Boldt-Christmas
wrote:
> When inflating a monitor the `ObjectMonitor*` is written directly over the
> `markWord` and any overwritten data is displaced into a displaced `markWord`.
> This is problematic for concurrent GCs which needs extra care or looser
When inflating a monitor the `ObjectMonitor*` is written directly over the
`markWord` and any overwritten data is displaced into a displaced `markWord`.
This is problematic for concurrent GCs which needs extra care or looser
semantics to use this displaced data. In Lilliput this data also
51 matches
Mail list logo
