Hi all,

  can I have reviews for this change that adds dedicated filler objects to the 
VM?

Currently, when formatting areas of dead objects all gcs use instances of 
j.l.Object and int-arrays.

This has the drawback of not being easily able to discern whether a given 
object is actually dead (and should never be referenced) or just a regular 
j.l.Object/int array.

This also makes enhanced error detection (any reference to such an object is an 
error - i.e. detecting references to such objects) and to skip potentially 
already unloaded classes when scanning areas of the heap below TAMS, G1 uses 
its prev bitmap.
Other collectors do not have this extra information at the moment, so they 
can't (and don't) do this kind of verification.

With [JDK-8210708](https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8210708) the prev 
bitmap will effectively be removed in G1; G1 will format the dead areas with 
these filler objects to avoid coming across unloaded classes. This is fine wrt 
to normal operation, however, this looses the existing enhanced verification 
mentioned above.

This change proposes to add dedicated VM-internal filler objects, i.e. 
equivalents of j.l.Object and int-arrays.

This has the following benefits:

- keep this error detection (actually making it much simpler) and allowing 
similar verification for other collectors. (This change does not add this)

- this also makes it "easy" to detect references to filler objects in debugging 
tools - you only need to know the two klasses (or just get their friendly name) 
to see whether that reference may actually be valid (or refers to the inside 
such an object). References to these classes in the crash file may also allow 
the issue to be more clear.

This causes some minor changes to external behavior:

- logs/heap dumps now contain instances of these objects - which seems fine as 
previously they have just been reported as part of j.l.Object/int-arrays 
statistics. The VM spec also does not guarantee whether a particular kind of 
object should/should not show there anyway afaik.

- if the application ever gets to instantiate a reference to such an object 
somehow, any enabled verification will crash the VM. That's bad luck for 
messing with internal classes, but that's the purpose of these objects.

The change takes care that getting a reference will not be possible by normal 
means (i.e. via Class.forName() etc) - which should be sufficient to avoid the 
issue. Actually, existing mechanisms seem to be sufficient.


Testing: tier1-8

There is one question I would like the reviewers to specially think about, the 
name of the filler array klass. I just used `Ljava/internal/vm/FillerArray;` 
for that, looking at other internal symbols/klasses, but I'm not sure this 
adheres to naming guidelines.

Thanks go to @iklam for helping out with the change.

Thanks,
  Thomas

-------------

Commit messages:
 - First stab at new filler - sjohanss

Changes: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/8156/files
 Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=jdk&pr=8156&range=00
  Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8284435
  Stats: 33 lines in 7 files changed: 27 ins; 1 del; 5 mod
  Patch: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/8156.diff
  Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk pull/8156/head:pull/8156

PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/8156

Reply via email to