Hi Paul,

a couple of comments on the patch:

- memoryService.hpp:
  + 150                   bool countCollection,
  + 151                   bool allMemoryPoolsAffected = true);

  There is no need to use a default value for the parameter
  allMemoryPoolsAffected here. Skipping the default value also allows
  you to put allMemoryPoolsAffected to TraceMemoryManager::initialize
  in the same relative position as for the constructor parameter (this
  will make the code more uniform and easier to follow).

- memoryManager.cpp

  Instead of adding a default parameter, maybe add a new method?
  Something like GCMemoryManager::add_not_always_affected_pool()
  (I couldn't come up with a shorter name at the moment).

- TestMixedOldGenCollectionUsage.java

  The test is too strict about how and when collections should
  occur. Tests written this way often become very brittle, they might
  e.g. fail to finish a concurrent mark on time on a very slow, single
  core, machine. It is better to either force collections by using the
  WhiteBox API or make the test more lenient.

Thanks,
Erik

On 02/22/2018 09:54 PM, Hohensee, Paul wrote:
Ping for a review please.

Thanks,

Paul

On 2/16/18, 12:26 PM, "serviceability-dev on behalf of Hohensee, Paul" 
<serviceability-dev-boun...@openjdk.java.net on behalf of hohen...@amazon.com> wrote:

     The CSR https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8196719 for the original 
fix has been approved, so I’m back to requesting a code review, please.
Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8195115
     Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~phh/8195115/webrev.hs.01/
Passed a submit repo run, passes its jtreg test, and a JDK8 version is in production use at Amazon. From the original RR: > The bug is that from the JMX point of view, G1’s incremental collector
         > (misnamed as the “G1 Young Generation” collector) only affects G1’s
         > survivor and eden spaces. In fact, mixed collections run by this
         > collector also affect the G1 old generation.
         >
         > This proposed fix is to record, for each of a JMX garbage collector's
         > memory pools, whether that memory pool is affected by all collections
         > using that collector. And, for each collection, record whether or not
         > all the collector's memory pools are affected. After each collection,
         > for each memory pool, if either all the collector's memory pools were
         > affected or the memory pool is affected for all collections, record
         > CollectionUsage for that pool.
         >
         > For collectors other than G1 Young Generation, all pools are 
recorded as
         > affected by all collections and every collection is recorded as
         > affecting all the collector’s memory pools. For the G1 Young 
Generation
         > collector, the G1 Old Gen pool is recorded as not being affected by 
all
         > collections, and non-mixed collections are recorded as not affecting 
all
         > memory pools. The result is that for non-mixed collections,
         > CollectionUsage is recorded after a collection only the G1 Eden Space
         > and G1 Survivor Space pools, while for mixed collections 
CollectionUsage
         > is recorded for G1 Old Gen as well.
         >
         > Other than the effect of the fix on G1 Old Gen MemoryPool.
         > CollectionUsage, the only external behavior change is that
         > GarbageCollectorMXBean.getMemoryPoolNames will now return 3 pool 
names
         > rather than 2.
         >
         > With this fix, a collector’s memory pools can be divided into two
         > disjoint subsets, one that participates in all collections and one 
that
         > doesn’t. This is a bit more general than the minimum necessary to fix
         > G1, but not by much. Because I expect it to apply to other 
incremental
         > region-based collectors, I went with the more general solution. I
         > minimized the amount of code I had to touch by using default 
parameters
         > for GCMemoryManager::add_pool and the TraceMemoryManagerStats 
constructors.



Reply via email to