On Thu, 22 Oct 2020 20:35:29 GMT, Richard Reingruber wrote:
>> The following test cases try to provoke VMOutOfMemoryException during object
>> reallocation:
>>
>> EAPopFrameNotInlinedReallocFailure
>> EAPopInlinedMethodWithScalarReplacedObjectsReallocFailure
>> EAForceEarlyReturnOfInlinedMethod
On Thu, 22 Oct 2020 14:29:28 GMT, Chris Plummer wrote:
>> You mentioned the possibility that the OOME is not thrown because it is
>> another thread that consumes all memory than the one calling
>> forceEarlyReturn() which is supposed to fail with OOME. TLAB could be an
>> issue then. In genera
> The following test cases try to provoke VMOutOfMemoryException during object
> reallocation:
>
> EAPopFrameNotInlinedReallocFailure
> EAPopInlinedMethodWithScalarReplacedObjectsReallocFailure
> EAForceEarlyReturnOfInlinedMethodWithScalarReplacedObjectsReallocFailure
>
> This is not 100% reliab
On Thu, 22 Oct 2020 17:16:23 GMT, Jonathan Gibbons wrote:
> The change is (just) to remove legacy usages of a JDK-private custom tag.
This pull request has now been integrated.
Changeset: 0aa3c925
Author:Jonathan Gibbons
URL: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/commit/0aa3c925
Stats:
On Thu, 22 Oct 2020 17:16:23 GMT, Jonathan Gibbons wrote:
> The change is (just) to remove legacy usages of a JDK-private custom tag.
Marked as reviewed by mchung (Reviewer).
-
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/814
On Thu, 22 Oct 2020 17:16:23 GMT, Jonathan Gibbons wrote:
> The change is (just) to remove legacy usages of a JDK-private custom tag.
Marked as reviewed by darcy (Reviewer).
-
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/814
On Thu, 22 Oct 2020 17:16:23 GMT, Jonathan Gibbons wrote:
> The change is (just) to remove legacy usages of a JDK-private custom tag.
As the creator of these tags many moons ago, I approve this change.
-
Marked as reviewed by mr (Lead).
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/81
On Thu, 22 Oct 2020 17:16:23 GMT, Jonathan Gibbons wrote:
> The change is (just) to remove legacy usages of a JDK-private custom tag.
Marked as reviewed by alanb (Reviewer).
-
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/814
On Thu, 22 Oct 2020 17:16:23 GMT, Jonathan Gibbons wrote:
> The change is (just) to remove legacy usages of a JDK-private custom tag.
Nice clean-up.
-
Marked as reviewed by iris (Reviewer).
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/814
On Thu, 22 Oct 2020 17:16:23 GMT, Jonathan Gibbons wrote:
> The change is (just) to remove legacy usages of a JDK-private custom tag.
looks fine
-
Marked as reviewed by lancea (Reviewer).
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/814
The change is (just) to remove legacy usages of a JDK-private custom tag.
-
Commit messages:
- JDK-8255262: Remove use of legacy custom @spec tag
Changes: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/814/files
Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=jdk&pr=814&range=00
Issue: htt
On Thu, 22 Oct 2020 08:48:20 GMT, Serguei Spitsyn wrote:
>> File test/hotspot/jtreg/vmTestbase/nsk/jdb/kill/kill001/kill001.java has
>> this change:
>>
>> for (int i = 0; i < threads.length; i++) {
>> reply = jdb.receiveReplyForWithMessageWait(JdbCommand.kill +
>> threads
On Mon, 19 Oct 2020 09:59:34 GMT, Robbin Ehn wrote:
> The main point of this change-set is to make it easier to implement S/R on
> top of handshakes.
> Which is a prerequisite for removing _suspend_flag (which duplicates the
> handshake functionality).
> But we also remove some complicated S/R
On Thu, 22 Oct 2020 10:44:21 GMT, Robbin Ehn wrote:
>> Looks good. Awesome fix IMO.
>
> Passes my local testing: open/test/jdk/com/sun/jdi/EATests.java, nsk_jvmti,
> nsk_jdi, jdk_jdi, jck:vm.
> Still running t1-t5 in test system.
>
> I will be integrating later today, so the ZGC/EscapeBarrier i
On Thu, 22 Oct 2020 13:07:32 GMT, Richard Reingruber wrote:
> But honestly I don't think it is worth it and I cannot even test if it fixes
> the issues. I'd prefer to skip the 3 test cases if running with ZGC. Please
> let me know what you prefer.
That's one option if this only happens with ZG
On Thu, 22 Oct 2020 07:57:32 GMT, Richard Reingruber wrote:
>>> The new LinkedListOfLongArrays is created by renaming LinkedList to
>>> LinkedListOfLongArrays. The new LinkedList is a list node without payload,
>>> so it
>>> is smaller than a LinkedListOfLongArrays node. I try to fill the last f
On Thu, 22 Oct 2020 10:04:48 GMT, Erik Österlund wrote:
>> Robbin Ehn has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
>> merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains seven commits:
>>
>> - Fixed merge miss
>> - Merge branch 'master' into
>> 8223312-Utilize-handshakes-instead
On Thu, 22 Oct 2020 08:50:54 GMT, Richard Reingruber wrote:
>> Depth 1 means top frame and its caller. In
>> UpdateForPopTopFrameClosure::doit() line 1606(?) the 2 top frames are
>> deoptimized. Reallocating objects while a frame pop request is processed
>> does not work if reallocation fails
On Thu, 22 Oct 2020 10:04:01 GMT, Erik Österlund wrote:
>> @robehn you haven't messed up. Hope I havn't either. I've tested
>>
>> ==
>> Test summary
>> ==
>>TEST TOTAL PASS FAIL ERROR
>>
> The main point of this change-set is to make it easier to implement S/R on
> top of handshakes.
> Which is a prerequisite for removing _suspend_flag (which duplicates the
> handshake functionality).
> But we also remove some complicated S/R methods.
>
> We basically just put in everything in t
On Thu, 22 Oct 2020 08:42:40 GMT, Richard Reingruber wrote:
>> Stack frames are counted beginning at 0. The top frame has depth 0. So
>> object deoptimization happens in the top frame.
>>
>> Still the used method is not optimal because it assumes that objects of
>> frames within the given dept
On Wed, 21 Oct 2020 08:40:47 GMT, Robbin Ehn wrote:
>> The main point of this change-set is to make it easier to implement S/R on
>> top of handshakes.
>> Which is a prerequisite for removing _suspend_flag (which duplicates the
>> handshake functionality).
>> But we also remove some complicated
On Mon, 19 Oct 2020 13:09:34 GMT, Lin Zang wrote:
>> - Parallel heap iteration support for PSS
>> - JBS: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8252103
>
> Lin Zang has refreshed the contents of this pull request, and previous
> commits have been removed. The incremental views will show diffe
On Wed, 21 Oct 2020 19:49:03 GMT, Stefan Johansson wrote:
>> Lin Zang has refreshed the contents of this pull request, and previous
>> commits have been removed. The incremental views will show differences
>> compared to the previous content of the PR.
>
> src/hotspot/share/gc/parallel/parallel
On Thu, 22 Oct 2020 08:23:38 GMT, Richard Reingruber wrote:
>> @reinrich did I mess something up when merging this in?
>
> Depth 1 means top frame and its caller. In
> UpdateForPopTopFrameClosure::doit() line 1606(?) the 2 top frames are
> deoptimized. Reallocating objects while a frame pop req
On Thu, 22 Oct 2020 08:03:15 GMT, Serguei Spitsyn wrote:
>> due to the same reasons in the case w/ `fields001`, these lines have 3 unit
>> indentation, 1st for `hc001` class, 2nd for `testInvalidCommands` method,
>> 3rd for `invClassNames` array initialization, so they have 3x4 = 12 spaces.
>
>
On Thu, 22 Oct 2020 08:14:47 GMT, Richard Reingruber wrote:
>> @reinrich did I mess something up when merging this in?
>
> Stack frames are counted beginning at 0. The top frame has depth 0. So object
> deoptimization happens in the top frame.
>
> Still the used method is not optimal because it
On Thu, 22 Oct 2020 08:04:48 GMT, Robbin Ehn wrote:
>> src/hotspot/share/prims/jvmtiEnv.cpp line 1663:
>>
>>> 1661: return JVMTI_ERROR_OUT_OF_MEMORY;
>>> 1662: }
>>> 1663: if (!eb.deoptimize_objects(1)) {
>>
>> Oh and why is the depth 1 here, when two frames are deoptimized? Maybe
On Thu, 22 Oct 2020 08:04:44 GMT, Robbin Ehn wrote:
>> src/hotspot/share/prims/jvmtiEnvBase.cpp line 1390:
>>
>>> 1388: return JVMTI_ERROR_OUT_OF_MEMORY;
>>> 1389: }
>>> 1390: if (!eb.deoptimize_objects(0)) {
>>
>> Why is the depth 0 here? That makes no sense to me. My understandi
On Wed, 21 Oct 2020 14:20:21 GMT, Richard Reingruber wrote:
>> src/hotspot/share/runtime/deoptimization.cpp line 1771:
>>
>>> 1769: Deoptimization::deoptimize_frame_internal(thread, id, reason);
>>> 1770: } else {
>>> 1771: VM_DeoptimizeFrame deopt(thread, id, reason);
>>
>> I guess V
On Wed, 21 Oct 2020 22:57:59 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
>> src/hotspot/share/prims/jvmtiEnvBase.cpp line 1661:
>>
>>> 1659: assert(vf->frame_pointer() != NULL, "frame pointer mustn't be
>>> NULL");
>>> 1660: if (java_thread->is_exiting() || java_thread->threadObj() == NULL) {
>>> 1661: re
On Wed, 21 Oct 2020 20:31:27 GMT, Erik Österlund wrote:
>> Robbin Ehn has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
>> merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains seven commits:
>>
>> - Fixed merge miss
>> - Merge branch 'master' into
>> 8223312-Utilize-handshakes-instead
On Wed, 21 Oct 2020 16:54:48 GMT, Daniel D. Daugherty
wrote:
>> Robbin Ehn has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
>> merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains seven commits:
>>
>> - Fixed merge miss
>> - Merge branch 'master' into
>> 8223312-Utilize-handshakes-i
On Wed, 21 Oct 2020 16:47:39 GMT, Daniel D. Daugherty
wrote:
>> src/hotspot/share/prims/jvmtiEnv.cpp line 1808:
>>
>>> 1806: }
>>> 1807: if (java_lang_Class::is_primitive(k_mirror)) {
>>> 1808: return JVMTI_ERROR_NONE;
>>
>> The call of JvmtiSuspendControl::print() seems to be el
On Thu, 22 Oct 2020 06:50:37 GMT, Richard Reingruber wrote:
>> Agreed. @sspitsyn - This makes me wonder if the lack of
>> synchronization is the cause of some instability in the
>> JVM/TI ForceEarlyReturn() testing.
>>
>> Update: The old code only made the updates if the thread was fully
>> susp
On Wed, 21 Oct 2020 14:02:59 GMT, Richard Reingruber wrote:
>> Robbin Ehn has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
>> merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains seven commits:
>>
>> - Fixed merge miss
>> - Merge branch 'master' into
>> 8223312-Utilize-handshakes-ins
On Wed, 21 Oct 2020 22:57:26 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
>> Especially if an assert() is added above on L1543.
>
> Agreed - this code has become confused about what thread variables are
> present and their relationship.
Fixed and moved assert.
-
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/p
On Mon, 19 Oct 2020 20:57:03 GMT, Igor Ignatyev wrote:
>> test/hotspot/jtreg/vmTestbase/nsk/jdb/hidden_class/hc001/hc001.java line 323:
>>
>>> 321: "xx.yyy/0x111/0x222",
>>> 322: "xx./0x111.0x222",
>>> 323: "xx.yyy.zzz/"
>>
>> Why are these indent
On Thu, 22 Oct 2020 05:06:43 GMT, Chris Plummer wrote:
> Earlier you said:
>
> > Note also that the OOME is successfully generated during object
> > reallocation a couple of times before (search "run args" in attachments
> > to the JBS issue).
>
> So I suppose in that case it's ok if this one t
On Wed, 21 Oct 2020 08:40:47 GMT, Robbin Ehn wrote:
>> The main point of this change-set is to make it easier to implement S/R on
>> top of handshakes.
>> Which is a prerequisite for removing _suspend_flag (which duplicates the
>> handshake functionality).
>> But we also remove some complicated
On Wed, 21 Oct 2020 08:40:47 GMT, Robbin Ehn wrote:
>> The main point of this change-set is to make it easier to implement S/R on
>> top of handshakes.
>> Which is a prerequisite for removing _suspend_flag (which duplicates the
>> handshake functionality).
>> But we also remove some complicated
On Wed, 21 Oct 2020 17:03:45 GMT, Daniel D. Daugherty
wrote:
>> src/hotspot/share/prims/jvmtiEnvBase.cpp line 1454:
>>
>>> 1452: _state->set_earlyret_pending();
>>> 1453: _state->set_earlyret_oop(ret_ob_h());
>>> 1454: _state->set_earlyret_value(_value, _tos);
>>
>> Good that these updat
On Wed, 21 Oct 2020 16:45:53 GMT, Daniel D. Daugherty
wrote:
>> Robbin Ehn has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
>> merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains seven commits:
>>
>> - Fixed merge miss
>> - Merge branch 'master' into
>> 8223312-Utilize-handshakes-i
On Thu, 22 Oct 2020 05:00:10 GMT, Thomas Stuefe wrote:
>
> 1. Like Alexey, I would really wish for an print-at-exit switch. The
> common naming seems to be xxxAtExit (so not, OnExit). "PrintXxx" seems to be
> printing stuff out to tty, "DumpXxxx" for writing separate files (e.g. CDS
> map
On Thu, 22 Oct 2020 04:57:18 GMT, Thomas Stuefe wrote:
>> Nick Gasson has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Update for review comments
>
> src/hotspot/share/code/codeCache.hpp line 194:
>
>> 192: static void print_summary(ou
On Wed, 21 Oct 2020 17:57:46 GMT, Chris Plummer wrote:
>> I'm not sure, I didn't want to add too much `#ifdef` mess. The code will
>> compile on other platforms, it just won't be called. Better to add `#ifdef`s
>> around all of it?
>
> Any reason not to have this dcmd supported on all platforms
46 matches
Mail list logo
