On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 14:26:24 GMT, Roger Riggs wrote:
>> Thanks @XueleiFan, that's fine by me!
>
> When using Reference/ReferenceQueue there is no Cleaner, only normal
> reference processing (via GC).
I have tests that use Reference/ReferenceQueue to check that an object that
uses a Cleaner has
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 08:40:06 GMT, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
>> @dfuch Taking a reference as parameter could simplify the use of ForceGC.
>> I though about this idea as well, when I had to check lambada expressions in
>> each call. I would like to do it in the future so that this PR could focus
>>
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 08:26:30 GMT, Xue-Lei Andrew Fan wrote:
>> Maybe not for this PR - but it could be useful to have a version of ForceGC
>> that takes as parameter a `ReferenceQueue` and a `Reference`. That
>> would be more efficient than creating a new object and waiting for a
>> different c
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 08:12:59 GMT, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
>> True, knowing when GC is 'done' is not deterministic except for a specify
>> Reference to a specific object.
>> System.gc is just a request, the checking for an object can more quickly
>> exit the loop.
>> The code is as is, and already co
On Thu, 30 Jun 2022 20:36:35 GMT, Roger Riggs wrote:
>> I'm not sure if all unused object will be collected in one GC call always.
>> The gc() specification says "When control returns from the method call, the
>> Java Virtual Machine has made a best effort to reclaim space from all unused
>>
On Thu, 30 Jun 2022 18:39:48 GMT, Xue-Lei Andrew Fan wrote:
>> test/lib/jdk/test/lib/util/ForceGC.java line 58:
>>
>>> 56: Reference.reachabilityFence(ref);
>>> 57:
>>> 58: for (int retries = (int)(timeout / 200); retries >= 0;
>>> retries--) {
>>
>> The logic around the timeo
On Thu, 30 Jun 2022 18:24:14 GMT, Xue-Lei Andrew Fan wrote:
>> test/lib/jdk/test/lib/util/ForceGC.java line 70:
>>
>>> 68: // But it is fine. For most cases, the 1st GC is
>>> sufficient
>>> 69: // to trigger and complete the cleanup.
>>> 70: que
On Thu, 30 Jun 2022 15:48:07 GMT, Roger Riggs wrote:
>> Xue-Lei Andrew Fan has updated the pull request with a new target base due
>> to a merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains 13 commits:
>>
>> - Master
>> - use Reference.refersTo
>> - remove trailing whitespaces
>> - use timeou
On Thu, 30 Jun 2022 15:53:10 GMT, Roger Riggs wrote:
>> Xue-Lei Andrew Fan has updated the pull request with a new target base due
>> to a merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains 13 commits:
>>
>> - Master
>> - use Reference.refersTo
>> - remove trailing whitespaces
>> - use timeou
On Sat, 18 Jun 2022 05:55:32 GMT, Xue-Lei Andrew Fan wrote:
>> This is a follow up update per comments in [JDK-8287384
>> PR](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/8907). The tier1 and tier2 test in
>> open part looks good to me. Please help to run Mach5 just case the closed
>> test cases are
On Sat, 18 Jun 2022 05:55:32 GMT, Xue-Lei Andrew Fan wrote:
>> This is a follow up update per comments in [JDK-8287384
>> PR](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/8907). The tier1 and tier2 test in
>> open part looks good to me. Please help to run Mach5 just case the closed
>> test cases are
> This is a follow up update per comments in [JDK-8287384
> PR](https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/8907__;!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!NNGX7uEj58t7UHOcS2PbUgT_R8PW8A2xNlmJ5N8WuCcgG8EPOLJBHAjRiwhXq_NhJ33K0VrDlHQxNLJpVy9XSw$
> ). The tier1 and tier2 test in open part looks good t
12 matches
Mail list logo
