On Fri, 15 Apr 2022 07:40:04 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
> I ran `codespell` on hotspot, and accepted those changes where it indeed
> discovered real typos.
>
> You'd be surprised over the many implementions of instrinsics and other
> intructions accross all archtectures I've encounted, so
On Tue, 2 Nov 2021 17:03:50 GMT, Evgeny Astigeevich
wrote:
>> src/hotspot/share/code/codeHeapState.cpp line 2340:
>>
>>> 2338:
>>> 2339: Klass* klass = method->method_holder();
>>> 2340: assert(klass->is_loader_alive(), "must be alive");
>>
>> Are you sure `klass` is a
On Mon, 1 Nov 2021 20:51:39 GMT, Evgeny Astigeevich
wrote:
> This PR changes nmethods names in `METHOD NAMES for CodeHeap` section to be
> qualified.
> Testing:
> - `make test TEST="gtest"`: Passed
> - `make run-test TEST="tier1"`: Passed
> - `make run-test TEST="tier2"`: Passed
> - `make run
On Wed, 11 Aug 2021 13:05:06 GMT, Ralf Schmelter wrote:
> This change triggers a GC by System.gc() in the test case, so the created
> heap dump is significantly smaller and the test runs much faster.
Changes look good to me.
Thanks for optimizing!
-
Marked as reviewed by lucy (Rev
On Wed, 3 Mar 2021 19:36:41 GMT, Vladimir Kozlov wrote:
>> Lutz Schmidt has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> revert copyright change to get rid of unchanged file
>
> Good.
Thank you, Vladi
On Wed, 10 Feb 2021 16:28:29 GMT, Lutz Schmidt wrote:
> Dear community,
> may I please request reviews for this fix, improving the usefulness of method
> invocation counters.
> - aggregation counters are retyped as uint64_t, shifting the overflow
> probability way out (> 500
On Wed, 3 Mar 2021 15:22:58 GMT, Igor Veresov wrote:
>> Lutz Schmidt has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> revert copyright change to get rid of unchanged file
>
> This looks good to me.
Thank
On Tue, 2 Mar 2021 20:01:22 GMT, Igor Veresov wrote:
>> Lutz Schmidt has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> 8261447: requested changes by TobiHartmann
>
> Changes requested by iveresov (Reviewer
higher update frequency than other counters.
> - before/after sample output is attached to the bug description.
>
> Thank you!
> Lutz
Lutz Schmidt has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
commit since the last revision:
revert copyright change to get rid of
higher update frequency than other counters.
> - before/after sample output is attached to the bug description.
>
> Thank you!
> Lutz
Lutz Schmidt has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
commit since the last revision:
Changes requested by veresov
-
On Tue, 2 Mar 2021 21:15:46 GMT, Igor Veresov wrote:
>> When you increment (2^31-1), you get 2^31 which is 0x8000. When
>> interpreted as signed int, it is MIN_INT. I don't want that. I want to treat
>> the value as positive number - what it actually is. There is no negative
>> count!
>
>
On Tue, 2 Mar 2021 20:46:01 GMT, Igor Veresov wrote:
>> src/hotspot/share/runtime/java.cpp line 100:
>>
>>> 98: int compare_methods(Method** a, Method** b) {
>>> 99: return (int32_t)(((uint32_t)(*b)->invocation_count() +
>>> (*b)->compiled_invocation_count())
>>> 100: - ((uin
On Tue, 2 Mar 2021 18:50:24 GMT, Igor Veresov wrote:
>> Will change.
>
> I'd be better to change the logic to check if the counter is ```>=
> InvocationCounter::count_limit``` then it's in overflow.
With overflow I do not mean "counter overflow" as it is used to trigger
compiler activities but
On Thu, 25 Feb 2021 16:31:58 GMT, Igor Veresov wrote:
>> src/hotspot/share/oops/method.cpp line 516:
>>
>>> 514: // This is ok because counters are unsigned by nature, and it gives
>>> us
>>> 515: // another factor of 2 before the counter values become meaningless.
>>> 516: // Print a "ov
On Tue, 2 Mar 2021 18:53:47 GMT, Igor Veresov wrote:
>> @veresov I can't see your comment re. the casts. The only comment I see is
>> re. the *64 suffixes.
>> Anyway, is your question/comment directly related to Vladimir's annotations?
>> Or do you need further reasoning? Please let me know.
>
On Tue, 2 Mar 2021 17:14:34 GMT, Vladimir Kozlov wrote:
>> Lutz Schmidt has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> comment changes requested by TheRealMDoerr
>
> I have few comments.
@veresov I can&#x
On Tue, 2 Mar 2021 16:44:44 GMT, Vladimir Kozlov wrote:
>> Lutz Schmidt has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> comment changes requested by TheRealMDoerr
>
> src/hotspot/share/oops/method.cpp line
On Tue, 2 Mar 2021 16:34:26 GMT, Vladimir Kozlov wrote:
>> Lutz Schmidt has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> comment changes requested by TheRealMDoerr
>
> src/hotspot/cpu/x86/vtableStubs_
On Mon, 1 Mar 2021 22:54:15 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
>> Thank you for your review, Tobias!
>> I'll delay integration for a while to give David and Igor a chance to react.
>
> Hi @RealLucy , I didn't do an actual review just made a passing comment.
@dholmes-ora OK then. I just didn't want to igno
On Mon, 1 Mar 2021 08:26:41 GMT, Tobias Hartmann wrote:
>> Lutz Schmidt has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> comment changes requested by TheRealMDoerr
>
> This looks good to me.
Thank you for y
On Thu, 11 Feb 2021 08:34:09 GMT, Tobias Hartmann wrote:
>> Lutz Schmidt has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> comment changes requested by TheRealMDoerr
>
> Changes requested by thartmann (Revie
higher update frequency than other counters.
> - before/after sample output is attached to the bug description.
>
> Thank you!
> Lutz
Lutz Schmidt has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
commit since the last revision:
comment changes requested b
On Wed, 24 Feb 2021 22:28:15 GMT, Martin Doerr wrote:
>> Lutz Schmidt has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> update copyright year
>
> src/hotspot/share/runtime/java.cpp line 100:
>
>
On Thu, 18 Feb 2021 05:12:08 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
>> Lutz Schmidt has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> update copyright year
>
> src/hotspot/share/oops/method.cpp line 511:
>
>
On Mon, 15 Feb 2021 18:21:53 GMT, Lutz Schmidt wrote:
>> This is a request for help. Could someone with SA knowledge please check if
>> my assumption is correct?
>>
>> In hotspot code, the field Method::_compiled_invocation_count is annotated
>> with a comment th
her update frequency than other counters.
> - before/after sample output is attached to the bug description.
>
> Thank you!
> Lutz
Lutz Schmidt has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
commit since the last revision:
update copyright year
-
Changes:
- a
her update frequency than other counters.
> - before/after sample output is attached to the bug description.
>
> Thank you!
> Lutz
Lutz Schmidt has updated the pull request incrementally with two additional
commits since the last revision:
- no incrementq for x86_32
- cleaning up the re
her update frequency than other counters.
> - before/after sample output is attached to the bug description.
>
> Thank you!
> Lutz
Lutz Schmidt has refreshed the contents of this pull request, and previous
commits have been removed. The incremental views will show differences compared
to the
her update frequency than other counters.
> - before/after sample output is attached to the bug description.
>
> Thank you!
> Lutz
Lutz Schmidt has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge
or a rebase. The pull request now contains five commits:
- 82614
On Fri, 12 Feb 2021 11:58:47 GMT, Lutz Schmidt wrote:
>> I introduced the *64 suffixes to not break anything that still uses the old
>> calls. As old uses disappear step by step, I'm more than happy to remove the
>> suffixes. I will have a look into SA and try to make
her update frequency than other counters.
> - before/after sample output is attached to the bug description.
>
> Thank you!
> Lutz
Lutz Schmidt has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge
or a rebase. The incremental webrev excludes the unrelated changes brought in
On Fri, 12 Feb 2021 08:29:37 GMT, Lutz Schmidt wrote:
>> I don't really like these .*64 suffixes. Can we just make the counter 64
>> bit, update the SA as Tobias suggested and keep the existing method names?
>> Or is there a reason for doing this that eludes me?
&
On Wed, 20 Jan 2021 03:36:52 GMT, Andrei Pangin wrote:
>> The changes look ok to me. I think it would be good to get someone from the
>> compiler team to verify your reasoning here.
>
> Hi Lutz,
>
> Thank you for working on this issue.
> I'm not a formal OpenJDK Reviewer, but as an author of as
Hi,
may I please ask the community to review this small fix? It closes another hole
in AsyncGetCallTrace().
Thanks a lot!
Lutz
-
Commit messages:
- 8259383: AsyncGetCallTrace() crashes sporadically
Changes: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/2032/files
Webrev: https://webrevs.
34 matches
Mail list logo
