Re: RFR: 8249004: Reduce ThreadsListHandle overhead in relation to direct handshakes [v10]
On Tue, 2 Nov 2021 17:26:41 GMT, Daniel D. Daugherty wrote:
>> A fix to reduce ThreadsListHandle overhead in relation to handshakes and
>> we add sanity checks for ThreadsListHandles higher in the call stack.
>>
>> This fix was tested with Mach5 Tier[1-8]; Tier8 is still running.
>
> Daniel D. Daugherty has updated the pull request incrementally with one
> additional commit since the last revision:
>
> 8249004.cr2.patch
Hi Dan,
Generally seems okay but a couple of minor issues below.
Thanks,
David
src/hotspot/share/runtime/handshake.cpp line 350:
> 348: }
> 349:
> 350: void Handshake::execute(HandshakeClosure* hs_cl, ThreadsListHandle*
> tlh_p, JavaThread* target) {
Nit: can we drop the `_p` part of `tlh_p` please.
src/hotspot/share/runtime/thread.cpp line 446:
> 444: Thread* current_thread = nullptr;
> 445: if (checkTLHOnly) {
> 446: current_thread = Thread::current();
This seems redundant due to line 463. You can just have a `if (!checkTLHOnly)`
block here.
src/hotspot/share/runtime/thread.cpp line 1764:
> 1762: guarantee(Thread::is_JavaThread_protected(this, /* checkTLHOnly */
> true),
> 1763: "missing ThreadsListHandle in calling context.");
> 1764: if (is_exiting()) {
Can't we remove this the same as we did for `java_suspend()`?
-
Changes requested by dholmes (Reviewer).
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/4677
Re: RFR: 8275729: Qualified method names in CodeHeap Analytics
On Mon, 1 Nov 2021 20:51:39 GMT, Evgeny Astigeevich wrote: > This PR changes nmethods names in `METHOD NAMES for CodeHeap` section to be > qualified. > Testing: > - `make test TEST="gtest"`: Passed > - `make run-test TEST="tier1"`: Passed > - `make run-test TEST="tier2"`: Passed > - `make run-test > TEST=serviceability/dcmd/compiler/CodeHeapAnalyticsMethodNames.java`: Passed BTW, you need to update Copyright year in file. - PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/6200
Re: RFR: 8275729: Qualified method names in CodeHeap Analytics
On Tue, 2 Nov 2021 23:03:22 GMT, Evgeny Astigeevich wrote: > Is NULL method holder an acceptable situation? Could it be a sign of a bug? You are right, all methods should have class holders. I just followed code pattern. > BTW, `Klass::external_name()` returns `` if `Klass::name()` is > `NULL`. I see, you want to have the same string instead of ``. Reasonable. I will test your changes too. File PR and I will review and post testing results. - PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/6200
Re: RFR: 8275729: Qualified method names in CodeHeap Analytics
On Tue, 2 Nov 2021 22:57:23 GMT, Vladimir Kozlov wrote:
> Yes, I am currently testing similar fix:
>
> ```
> -Klass* klass = method->method_holder();
> -assert(klass->is_loader_alive(), "must be alive");
> +Klass* methHolder = method->method_holder();
> +const char*methHolderS = (methHolder == NULL) ? NULL :
> methHolder->external_name();
> +methHolderS = (methHolderS == NULL) ? " unavailable>" : methHolderS;
>
> -ast->print("%s.", klass->external_name());
> +ast->print("%s.", methHolderS);
> ```
>
> Note, failed test is `closed` so I have to run testing.
Is NULL method holder an acceptable situation? Could it be a sign of a bug?
BTW, `Klass::external_name()` returns `` if `Klass::name()` is `NULL`.
-
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/6200
Re: RFR: 8275729: Qualified method names in CodeHeap Analytics
On Mon, 1 Nov 2021 20:51:39 GMT, Evgeny Astigeevich
wrote:
> This PR changes nmethods names in `METHOD NAMES for CodeHeap` section to be
> qualified.
> Testing:
> - `make test TEST="gtest"`: Passed
> - `make run-test TEST="tier1"`: Passed
> - `make run-test TEST="tier2"`: Passed
> - `make run-test
> TEST=serviceability/dcmd/compiler/CodeHeapAnalyticsMethodNames.java`: Passed
Yes, I am currently testing similar fix:
-Klass* klass = method->method_holder();
-assert(klass->is_loader_alive(), "must be alive");
+Klass* methHolder = method->method_holder();
+const char*methHolderS = (methHolder == NULL) ? NULL :
methHolder->external_name();
+methHolderS = (methHolderS == NULL) ? "" : methHolderS;
-ast->print("%s.", klass->external_name());
+ast->print("%s.", methHolderS);
Note, failed test is `closed` so I have to run testing.
-
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/6200
Re: RFR: 8275729: Qualified method names in CodeHeap Analytics
On Tue, 2 Nov 2021 22:05:01 GMT, Vladimir Kozlov wrote:
> I don't think we need this assert just to print klass's name. May be follow
> the code pattern for method's name and signature.
Agree. I'll submit PR with the code:
Symbol* className = klass->name();
const char* classNameS = (className == nullptr) ? nullptr :
className->external_name();
classNameS = (classNameS == nullptr) ? "" : classNameS;
ast->print("%s.", classNameS);
-
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/6200
Re: RFR: 8275729: Qualified method names in CodeHeap Analytics
On Mon, 1 Nov 2021 20:51:39 GMT, Evgeny Astigeevich wrote: > This PR changes nmethods names in `METHOD NAMES for CodeHeap` section to be > qualified. > Testing: > - `make test TEST="gtest"`: Passed > - `make run-test TEST="tier1"`: Passed > - `make run-test TEST="tier2"`: Passed > - `make run-test > TEST=serviceability/dcmd/compiler/CodeHeapAnalyticsMethodNames.java`: Passed I don't think we need this assert just to print klass's name - PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/6200
Integrated: JDK-8274930: sun/tools/jps/TestJps.java can fail with long VM arguments string
On Thu, 7 Oct 2021 21:46:47 GMT, Alex Menkov wrote: > The fix adds "-XX:PerfMaxStringConstLength" argument running target app > (default is 1024, 8K should be enough for any environments) This pull request has now been integrated. Changeset: bb92fb02 Author:Alex Menkov URL: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/commit/bb92fb02ca8c5795989065a9037748dc39ed77db Stats: 2 lines in 1 file changed: 1 ins; 0 del; 1 mod 8274930: sun/tools/jps/TestJps.java can fail with long VM arguments string Reviewed-by: sspitsyn, lmesnik - PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/5858
Re: RFR: 8275729: Qualified method names in CodeHeap Analytics
On Mon, 1 Nov 2021 20:51:39 GMT, Evgeny Astigeevich wrote: > This PR changes nmethods names in `METHOD NAMES for CodeHeap` section to be > qualified. > Testing: > - `make test TEST="gtest"`: Passed > - `make run-test TEST="tier1"`: Passed > - `make run-test TEST="tier2"`: Passed > - `make run-test > TEST=serviceability/dcmd/compiler/CodeHeapAnalyticsMethodNames.java`: Passed The change caused failure in our testing: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8276429 @eastig I will assign it to you - PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/6200
Re: RFR: 8276208: vmTestbase/nsk/jdb/repeat/repeat001/repeat001.java fails with "AssertionError: Unexpected output" [v2]
On Tue, 2 Nov 2021 01:07:30 GMT, Jakob Cornell wrote: >> This will fix a few issues with the tests added in #5290: >> >> - [x] intermittent failures >> - [x] tests should use `failure` method to report problems rather than >> throwing `AssertionError` > > Jakob Cornell has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional > commit since the last revision: > > Fix incorrect use of `receiveReplyFor' causing test failures LGTM - Marked as reviewed by iklam (Reviewer). PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/6182
Re: RFR: 8275729: Qualified method names in CodeHeap Analytics
On Tue, 2 Nov 2021 17:03:50 GMT, Evgeny Astigeevich
wrote:
>> src/hotspot/share/code/codeHeapState.cpp line 2340:
>>
>>> 2338:
>>> 2339: Klass* klass = method->method_holder();
>>> 2340: assert(klass->is_loader_alive(), "must be alive");
>>
>> Are you sure `klass` is always valid here and that its class loader has to
>> be alive (i.e. the corresponding class hasn't been unloaded in the meantime)?
>>
>> In [https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8275729](JDK-8275729) you say
>> that the Top50 list already has qualified names but as far as I know, that
>> information is already collected in the aggregation step where it is safe.
>> You now query this information in the reporting step.
>>
>> I know we had problems due to access to dead methods before (see
>> [JDK-8219586: CodeHeap State Analytics processes dead
>> nmethods](https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8219586) and I just want
>> to make sure we don't re-introduce such problems.
>>
>> Maybe @RealLucy or @fisk can have an additional look?
>
> @simonis
> The code is guarded by checks:
>
> // access nmethod and Method fields only if we own the CodeCache_lock.
> // This fact is implicitly transported via nm != NULL.
> if (nmethod_access_is_safe(nm)) {
> ...
> bool get_name = (cbType == nMethod_inuse) || (cbType ==
> nMethod_notused);
> ...
> if (get_name) {
>
> I was thinking whether I should use `if (klass->is_loader_alive())` or
> `assert(klass->is_loader_alive())`. I chose the assert because if it is safe
> to access `Method` than its holder `Klass` must be alive.
Hi,
the code is safe. Not because of the checks cited by @eastig but because
print_names() is only called if the required locks (Compile_lock and
CodeCache_lock) have been continuously held since the aggregation step. See
src/hotspot/share/compiler/compileBroker.cpp. A lot of effort has been spent to
be less restrictive on print_names(), with no success.
Thanks for the enhancement.
-
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/6200
Re: RFR: 8275729: Qualified method names in CodeHeap Analytics
On Mon, 1 Nov 2021 20:51:39 GMT, Evgeny Astigeevich wrote: > This PR changes nmethods names in `METHOD NAMES for CodeHeap` section to be > qualified. > Testing: > - `make test TEST="gtest"`: Passed > - `make run-test TEST="tier1"`: Passed > - `make run-test TEST="tier2"`: Passed > - `make run-test > TEST=serviceability/dcmd/compiler/CodeHeapAnalyticsMethodNames.java`: Passed To me, the change looks good. - PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/6200
Re: RFR: 8276208: vmTestbase/nsk/jdb/repeat/repeat001/repeat001.java fails with "AssertionError: Unexpected output" [v2]
On Tue, 2 Nov 2021 01:07:30 GMT, Jakob Cornell wrote: >> This will fix a few issues with the tests added in #5290: >> >> - [x] intermittent failures >> - [x] tests should use `failure` method to report problems rather than >> throwing `AssertionError` > > Jakob Cornell has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional > commit since the last revision: > > Fix incorrect use of `receiveReplyFor' causing test failures @iklam - Can you review this fix? You were one of the original reviewers on: JDK-8271356 Modify jdb to treat an empty command as a repeat of the previous command Thanks! - PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/6182
Re: RFR: 8275729: Qualified method names in CodeHeap Analytics
On Tue, 2 Nov 2021 05:49:30 GMT, Yi Yang wrote: >> This PR changes nmethods names in `METHOD NAMES for CodeHeap` section to be >> qualified. >> Testing: >> - `make test TEST="gtest"`: Passed >> - `make run-test TEST="tier1"`: Passed >> - `make run-test TEST="tier2"`: Passed >> - `make run-test >> TEST=serviceability/dcmd/compiler/CodeHeapAnalyticsMethodNames.java`: Passed > > This looks good now. Old output can not tell us which class the method > belongs to. > > > Old: > 0x7f6e91063010 (+0x0010) 0x00a0( 0K) none 0480 nMethod > (deopt) nmethod > 0x7f6e91063310 (+0x0310) 0x00f8( 0K) none 0480 nMethod > (active)name()Ljava/lang/String; > 0x7f6e91063610 (+0x0610) 0x00f8( 0K) none 0480 nMethod > (active)descriptor()Ljava/lang/module/ModuleDescriptor; > 0x7f6e91063910 (+0x0910) 0x( 0K) none 0480 nMethod > (active)getReferenceVolatile(Ljava/lang/Object;J)Ljava/lang/Object; > 0x7f6e91063d90 (+0x0d90) 0x( 0K) none 0480 nMethod > (active)hashCode()I > 0x7f6e91064190 (+0x1190) 0x00f8( 0K)c1 1480 nMethod > (active)name()Ljava/lang/String; > 0x7f6e91064490 (+0x1490) 0x00f8( 0K)c1 1480 nMethod > (active)modifiers()Ljava/util/Set; > 0x7f6e91064790 (+0x1790) 0x00f8( 0K)c1 1480 nMethod > (active)targets()Ljava/util/Set; > 0x7f6e91064a90 (+0x1a90) 0x00f8( 0K)c1 1480 nMethod > (active)source()Ljava/lang/String; > 0x7f6e91064d90 (+0x1d90) 0x00f8( 0K)c1 1480 nMethod > (active)isEmpty()Z > New: > > 0x7f08adc94010 (+0x0010) 0x0150( 0K)c1 3480 nMethod > (deopt) nmethod > 0x7f08adc94390 (+0x0390) 0x01b0( 0K)c1 3480 nMethod > (active)java.lang.String.isLatin1()Z > 0x7f08adc94710 (+0x0710) 0x0258( 0K)c1 3480 nMethod > (active) > jdk.internal.util.Preconditions.checkIndex(IILjava/util/function/BiFunction;)I > 0x7f08adc94b90 (+0x0b90) 0x04e8( 1K)c1 3480 nMethod > (deopt) nmethod > 0x7f08adc95310 (+0x1310) 0x0298( 0K)c1 3480 nMethod > (active)java.lang.StringLatin1.charAt([BI)C > 0x7f08adc95790 (+0x1790) 0x01a0( 0K)c1 3480 nMethod > (active)java.lang.String.checkIndex(II)V > 0x7f08adc95b10 (+0x1b10) 0x0170( 0K)c1 3480 nMethod > (active)java.lang.String.coder()B > 0x7f08adc95e90 (+0x1e90) 0x03e8( 0K)c1 3480 nMethod > (active)java.lang.String.hashCode()I > 0x7f08adc96490 (+0x2490) 0x0130( 0K)c1 3480 nMethod > (deopt) nmethod > 0x7f08adc96790 (+0x2790) 0x0210( 0K)c1 3480 nMethod > (active)java.lang.String.length()I Thanks for reviewing @kelthuzadx and @TobiHartmann. - PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/6200
Re: RFR: 8249004: Reduce ThreadsListHandle overhead in relation to direct handshakes [v6]
On Fri, 15 Oct 2021 18:31:26 GMT, Coleen Phillimore wrote: >> Daniel D. Daugherty has updated the pull request incrementally with one >> additional commit since the last revision: >> >> 8249004.cr1.patch > > This has more moving pieces than the last version. I'm a bit uneasy about > passing NULL as a thread to Handshake::execute(). This shouldn't be something > that should happen. @coleenp and @dholmes-ora, the latest version should address the last of your previous comments. Please re-review when you get the chance. @robehn and @sspitsyn - It would be good to get re-reviews from you guys on this latest version. Thanks! - PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/4677
Re: RFR: 8249004: Reduce ThreadsListHandle overhead in relation to direct handshakes [v10]
> A fix to reduce ThreadsListHandle overhead in relation to handshakes and > we add sanity checks for ThreadsListHandles higher in the call stack. > > This fix was tested with Mach5 Tier[1-8]; Tier8 is still running. Daniel D. Daugherty has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision: 8249004.cr2.patch - Changes: - all: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/4677/files - new: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/4677/files/045b3e0d..3e1d1b06 Webrevs: - full: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=jdk=4677=09 - incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=jdk=4677=08-09 Stats: 128 lines in 5 files changed: 22 ins; 46 del; 60 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/4677.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk pull/4677/head:pull/4677 PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/4677
Re: RFR: 8275729: Qualified method names in CodeHeap Analytics
On Tue, 2 Nov 2021 16:34:34 GMT, Volker Simonis wrote:
>> This PR changes nmethods names in `METHOD NAMES for CodeHeap` section to be
>> qualified.
>> Testing:
>> - `make test TEST="gtest"`: Passed
>> - `make run-test TEST="tier1"`: Passed
>> - `make run-test TEST="tier2"`: Passed
>> - `make run-test
>> TEST=serviceability/dcmd/compiler/CodeHeapAnalyticsMethodNames.java`: Passed
>
> src/hotspot/share/code/codeHeapState.cpp line 2340:
>
>> 2338:
>> 2339: Klass* klass = method->method_holder();
>> 2340: assert(klass->is_loader_alive(), "must be alive");
>
> Are you sure `klass` is always valid here and that its class loader has to be
> alive (i.e. the corresponding class hasn't been unloaded in the meantime)?
>
> In [https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8275729](JDK-8275729) you say
> that the Top50 list already has qualified names but as far as I know, that
> information is already collected in the aggregation step where it is safe.
> You now query this information in the reporting step.
>
> I know we had problems due to access to dead methods before (see
> [JDK-8219586: CodeHeap State Analytics processes dead
> nmethods](https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8219586) and I just want
> to make sure we don't re-introduce such problems.
>
> Maybe @RealLucy or @fisk can have an additional look?
@simonis
The code is guarded by checks:
// access nmethod and Method fields only if we own the CodeCache_lock.
// This fact is implicitly transported via nm != NULL.
if (nmethod_access_is_safe(nm)) {
...
bool get_name = (cbType == nMethod_inuse) || (cbType ==
nMethod_notused);
...
if (get_name) {
I was thinking whether I should use `if (klass->is_loader_alive())` or
`assert(klass->is_loader_alive())`. I chose the assert because if it is safe to
access `Method` than its holder `Klass` must be alive.
-
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/6200
Integrated: 8276367: ProblemList vmTestbase/nsk/jvmti/RedefineClasses/StressRedefineWithoutBytecodeCorruption/TestDescription.java
On Tue, 2 Nov 2021 16:34:26 GMT, Daniel D. Daugherty wrote: > A trivial fix to ProblemList > vmTestbase/nsk/jvmti/RedefineClasses/StressRedefineWithoutBytecodeCorruption/TestDescription.java This pull request has now been integrated. Changeset: 01105d69 Author:Daniel D. Daugherty URL: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/commit/01105d6985b39d4064b9066eab3612da5a401685 Stats: 1 line in 1 file changed: 1 ins; 0 del; 0 mod 8276367: ProblemList vmTestbase/nsk/jvmti/RedefineClasses/StressRedefineWithoutBytecodeCorruption/TestDescription.java Reviewed-by: bpb - PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/6214
Re: Integrated: 8276367: ProblemList vmTestbase/nsk/jvmti/RedefineClasses/StressRedefineWithoutBytecodeCorruption/TestDescription.java
On Tue, 2 Nov 2021 16:47:08 GMT, Brian Burkhalter wrote: >> A trivial fix to ProblemList >> vmTestbase/nsk/jvmti/RedefineClasses/StressRedefineWithoutBytecodeCorruption/TestDescription.java > > Marked as reviewed by bpb (Reviewer). @bplb - Thanks for the fast review. - PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/6214
Re: Integrated: 8276367: ProblemList vmTestbase/nsk/jvmti/RedefineClasses/StressRedefineWithoutBytecodeCorruption/TestDescription.java
On Tue, 2 Nov 2021 16:34:26 GMT, Daniel D. Daugherty wrote: > A trivial fix to ProblemList > vmTestbase/nsk/jvmti/RedefineClasses/StressRedefineWithoutBytecodeCorruption/TestDescription.java Marked as reviewed by bpb (Reviewer). - PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/6214
Integrated: 8276367: ProblemList vmTestbase/nsk/jvmti/RedefineClasses/StressRedefineWithoutBytecodeCorruption/TestDescription.java
A trivial fix to ProblemList vmTestbase/nsk/jvmti/RedefineClasses/StressRedefineWithoutBytecodeCorruption/TestDescription.java - Commit messages: - 8276367: ProblemList vmTestbase/nsk/jvmti/RedefineClasses/StressRedefineWithoutBytecodeCorruption/TestDescription.java Changes: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/6214/files Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=jdk=6214=00 Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8276367 Stats: 1 line in 1 file changed: 1 ins; 0 del; 0 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/6214.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk pull/6214/head:pull/6214 PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/6214
Re: RFR: 8275729: Qualified method names in CodeHeap Analytics
On Mon, 1 Nov 2021 20:51:39 GMT, Evgeny Astigeevich wrote: > This PR changes nmethods names in `METHOD NAMES for CodeHeap` section to be > qualified. > Testing: > - `make test TEST="gtest"`: Passed > - `make run-test TEST="tier1"`: Passed > - `make run-test TEST="tier2"`: Passed > - `make run-test > TEST=serviceability/dcmd/compiler/CodeHeapAnalyticsMethodNames.java`: Passed Volker, I sponsored this before you posted your review. Evgeny, if it's a problem, please file a bug. - PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/6200
Re: RFR: 8275729: Qualified method names in CodeHeap Analytics
On Mon, 1 Nov 2021 20:51:39 GMT, Evgeny Astigeevich wrote: > This PR changes nmethods names in `METHOD NAMES for CodeHeap` section to be > qualified. > Testing: > - `make test TEST="gtest"`: Passed > - `make run-test TEST="tier1"`: Passed > - `make run-test TEST="tier2"`: Passed > - `make run-test > TEST=serviceability/dcmd/compiler/CodeHeapAnalyticsMethodNames.java`: Passed No problem, I know I was late :) But I also know that this is a sensitive area, so better double check... - PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/6200
Re: RFR: 8275729: Qualified method names in CodeHeap Analytics
On Mon, 1 Nov 2021 20:51:39 GMT, Evgeny Astigeevich wrote: > This PR changes nmethods names in `METHOD NAMES for CodeHeap` section to be > qualified. > Testing: > - `make test TEST="gtest"`: Passed > - `make run-test TEST="tier1"`: Passed > - `make run-test TEST="tier2"`: Passed > - `make run-test > TEST=serviceability/dcmd/compiler/CodeHeapAnalyticsMethodNames.java`: Passed src/hotspot/share/code/codeHeapState.cpp line 2340: > 2338: > 2339: Klass* klass = method->method_holder(); > 2340: assert(klass->is_loader_alive(), "must be alive"); Are you sure `klass` is always valid here and that its class loader has to be alive (i.e. the corresponding class hasn't been unloaded in the meantime)? In [https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8275729](JDK-8275729) you say that the Top50 list already has qualified names but as far as I know, that information is already collected in the aggregation step where it is safe. You now query this information in the reporting step. I know we had problems due to access to dead methods before (see [JDK-8219586: CodeHeap State Analytics processes dead nmethods](https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8219586) and I just want to make sure we don't re-introduce such problems. Maybe @RealLucy or @fisk can have an additional look? - PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/6200
Integrated: 8275729: Qualified method names in CodeHeap Analytics
On Mon, 1 Nov 2021 20:51:39 GMT, Evgeny Astigeevich wrote: > This PR changes nmethods names in `METHOD NAMES for CodeHeap` section to be > qualified. > Testing: > - `make test TEST="gtest"`: Passed > - `make run-test TEST="tier1"`: Passed > - `make run-test TEST="tier2"`: Passed > - `make run-test > TEST=serviceability/dcmd/compiler/CodeHeapAnalyticsMethodNames.java`: Passed This pull request has now been integrated. Changeset: 8fc16f16 Author:Evgeny Astigeevich Committer: Paul Hohensee URL: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/commit/8fc16f1605b396bfb9265a97bc126d435d6d5951 Stats: 75 lines in 2 files changed: 75 ins; 0 del; 0 mod 8275729: Qualified method names in CodeHeap Analytics Reviewed-by: yyang, thartmann - PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/6200
Re: RFR: 8275729: Qualified method names in CodeHeap Analytics
On Mon, 1 Nov 2021 20:51:39 GMT, Evgeny Astigeevich wrote: > This PR changes nmethods names in `METHOD NAMES for CodeHeap` section to be > qualified. > Testing: > - `make test TEST="gtest"`: Passed > - `make run-test TEST="tier1"`: Passed > - `make run-test TEST="tier2"`: Passed > - `make run-test > TEST=serviceability/dcmd/compiler/CodeHeapAnalyticsMethodNames.java`: Passed Looks good to me. - Marked as reviewed by thartmann (Reviewer). PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/6200
Integrated: 8275735: [linux] Remove deprecated Metrics api (kernel memory limit)
On Thu, 28 Oct 2021 13:03:56 GMT, Severin Gehwolf wrote: > Please review this change to remove some API which no longer works as > expected as recent OCI runtimes start to drop support for `--kernel-memory` > switch. See the bug for references. This part of the API is not present in > hotspot code. > > Testing: Container tests (cgroup v1) on Linux x86_64 (all pass) This pull request has now been integrated. Changeset: 9971a2ca Author:Severin Gehwolf URL: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/commit/9971a2cab3892a17f3fd39243df5ecfff5b9f108 Stats: 104 lines in 6 files changed: 0 ins; 100 del; 4 mod 8275735: [linux] Remove deprecated Metrics api (kernel memory limit) Reviewed-by: hseigel, mchung - PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/6156
