On Tue, 19 Mar 2024 12:17:22 GMT, David Holmes <dhol...@openjdk.org> wrote:
> But all this discussion suggests to me that this PR is not really worth > pursuing at this time - IIUC no actual failures are observed other than those > pertaining to AssertWXAtThreadSync and that flag will be gone if we do decide > to be more fine-grained about WX management. I see it differently. This PR is just a simple attempt to get clean test runs with AssertWXAtThreadSync (after fixing an actual crash https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8327036). While the violating locations in this PR might be unlikely to produce actual crashes I think it is worthwhile to have clean testing with AssertWXAtThreadSync because this will help prevent regressions that are more likely. Beyond the trivial fixes of this PR I'm very much in favor of further enhancements as the aforementioned https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8307817. My recommendation would be to remove as much non-constant data from the code cache as possible. ------------- PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/18238#issuecomment-2007709981
