Thanks a bunch, JC ! Could have a Reviewer also take a look at this please ?

- Jini.

On 11/21/2018 11:05 PM, JC Beyler wrote:
Hi Jini,

Looks good to me, thanks for fixing the nits :)

Thanks,
Jc


On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 9:29 AM Jini George <jini.geo...@oracle.com <mailto:jini.geo...@oracle.com>> wrote:

    The modified webrev with the RuntimeException and the nit removed is at:

    http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jgeorge/8213323/webrev.01/

    Thanks!
    Jini.

    On 11/12/2018 12:41 PM, Jini George wrote:
     > Thank you very much, JC, for looking into this.
     >
     >
    http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/zgc-dev/2018-August/000455.html
     >
     > The link above provides an explanation of why it is difficult to
    support
     > ZGC with SA where there is an iteration over the heap. And
    currently, I
     > am unsure as to whether we will devise a way to overcome this
    issue. We
     > currently have the following JBS entry for tracking this.
     >
     > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8207843 (SA: Add support
    for
     > Object Histogram with ZGC)
     >
     > I have added a comment in the ER above to keep track of enabling the
     > tests if this is resolved.
     >
     > I agree with your comment on throwing a RuntimeException. Doing this
     > avoids the misleading "heap written to" message. I will modify
    this and
     > remove the ';' you pointed out and post another webrev.
     >
     > Thank you,
     > Jini.
     >
     >
     >
     > On 11/9/2018 9:36 PM, JC Beyler wrote:
     >> Hi Jini,
     >>
     >> The webrev looks good to me as well except for a few
    questions/comments:
     >>
     >> I have a generic question that is related to the webrev:
     >>    - Are there plans at some point for Jmap to support ZGC heaps in
     >> the future ? Or is this infeasible?
     >>          I ask because if a lot of tests are disabled for ZGC for a
     >> limited amount of time (in order to provide time for future
    support)
     >> there should be a means to scrub the tests at a later date to see
     >> which are now supported, no?
     >>
     >>    - In
     >>
    
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jgeorge/8213323/webrev.00/src/jdk.hotspot.agent/share/classes/sun/jvm/hotspot/utilities/HeapHprofBinWriter.java.html:

     >>
     >>
     >>   397         if (vm.getUniverse().heap() instanceof
    ZCollectedHeap) {
     >>   398             System.err.println("WARNING: Operation not
    supported
     >> for ZGC.");
     >>   399             return;
     >>   400         };
     >>
     >>       - 1 nit is the ';'  after the closing '}'
     >>       - Should the code throw a RuntimeException instead? Just
     >> printing an error seems "weak" for me when this really won't
    work. Of
     >> course, that means tracking the callers now of write and probably
     >> adding exception handling there and I'm not sure that is something
     >> that is warranted here but thought I would ask :)
     >>
     >> Thanks!
     >> Jc
     >>
     >>
     >>
     >> Thanks,
     >> Jc
     >>
     >> On Fri, Nov 9, 2018 at 1:47 AM gary.ad...@oracle.com
    <mailto:gary.ad...@oracle.com>
     >> <mailto:gary.ad...@oracle.com <mailto:gary.ad...@oracle.com>>
    <gary.ad...@oracle.com <mailto:gary.ad...@oracle.com>
     >> <mailto:gary.ad...@oracle.com <mailto:gary.ad...@oracle.com>>>
    wrote:
     >>
     >>     Looks OK to me.
     >>
     >>     On 11/9/18 1:40 AM, Jini George wrote:
     >>      > Hello!
     >>      >
     >>      > Requesting reviews for a small change for disabling the
    testing of
     >>      > TestJmapCoreMetaspace.java and TestJmapCore.java with
    ZGC. The
     >>     change
     >>      > also includes skipping of creating the heapdump file with
    jmap if
     >>     the
     >>      > GC being used is ZGC.
     >>      >
     >>      > Webrev:
    http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jgeorge/8213323/webrev.00/
     >>      > Bug ID: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8213323
     >>      >
     >>      > Thanks,
     >>      > Jini.
     >>
     >>
     >>
     >>
     >> --
     >>
     >> Thanks,
     >> Jc



--

Thanks,
Jc

Reply via email to