I would suggest reducing stress amount in the tests. This code has not changed and so this is not a regression. We should support 64 bit vtable refs for uncompressed mode in the next milestone and run tests like this in full uncompressed mode.
On Dec 14, 2007 10:46 AM, Pavel Pervov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I believe this is not a regression at all. This code existed from the very > beginning in DRLVM. > > For now we can either specify bigger pool for DLRVM, or reduce stress > amount > in the tests. > > Eugene, what do you think? > > > On 12/14/07, Mikhail Loenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > How it worked before? > > > > 2007/12/14, Xiao-Feng Li <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > On Dec 14, 2007 9:39 PM, Eugene Ostrovsky < > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > > > Hi all! > > > > > > > > We have a regression in stress test suite: > > > > http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-5047 > > > > > > > > The problem is that in compressed VTable pointers mode (which is > > > > default for x86_64 platforms) number of classes that VM could load > is > > > > limited by the size of VTable memory pool = 8 MB. VM crashes > because > > > > VT pool is overflowed when the test tries to load about 34000 > classes. > > > > (VTable for each class is >= 232 B) > > > > > > > > It seems that we need smarter memory management for VTables in > > compressed mode. > > > > Or probably we should disable compressed VTable pointers at all. > > > > > > Eugene, agree. I guess it should be easy to have a resizable pool for > > > Vtables by preserving bigger address space for it. Of course, > > > uncompressed vtable is also a solution. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > xiaofeng > > > > > > > Proposals are welcome. > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Eugene. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > http://xiao-feng.blogspot.com > > > > > > > > > -- > Pavel Pervov, > Intel Enterprise Solutions Software Division >
