Hi Ralf,
thanks for providing this enhancement to parallel gzip-compress heap dumps!
I reckon it's safe to say that the coding is sophisticated. It would be awesome
if you could sketch
the idea of how HeapDumper, DumpWriter and CompressionBackend work together to
produce the gzipped
dump in a source code comment. Just enough to get started if somebody should
ever have to track down
a bug -- an unlikely event, I know ;)
Please find the details of my review below.
Thanks, Richard.
// Not Reviewer
--
### src/hotspot/share/services/diagnosticCommand.cpp
510 _gzip_level("-gz-level", "The compression level from 0 (store) to 9
(best) when writing in gzipped format.",
511 "INT", "FALSE", "1") {
"FALSE" should be probably false.
### src/hotspot/share/services/diagnosticCommand.hpp
Ok.
### src/hotspot/share/services/heapDumper.cpp
390: Typo: initized
415: Typo: GZipComressor
477: Could you please add a comment, how the "HPROF BLOCKSIZE" comment is
helpful?
539: Member variables of WriteWork are missing the '_' prefix.
546: Just a comment: WriteWork::in_max is actually a compile time constant.
Would be nice if it could be
declared so. One could use templates for this, but then my favourite ide
(eclipse cdt) doesn't
show me references and call hierarchies anymore. So I don't think it is
worth it.
591: Typo: Removes the first element. Returns NULL is empty.
663: _writer, _compressor, _lock could be const.
762: assert(_active, "Must be active");
It appears to me that the assertion would fail, if an error occurred
creating the CompressionBackend.
767: I think _current->in_used doesn't take the final 9 bytes into account that
are written in
DumperSupport::end_of_dump() after the last dump segment has been finished.
You could call get_new_buffer() instead of the if clause.
903: Typo: Check if we don not waste more than _max_waste
1064: DumpWriter::DumpWriter()
There doesn't seem to be enough error handling if _buffer cannot be
allocated.
E.g. DumpWriter::write_raw() at line 1091 will enter an endless loop.
2409: A comment, why Shenandoah is not supported, would be good.
In general I'd say it is good and natural to use the GC work threads.
### src/hotspot/share/services/heapDumper.hpp
Ok.
### src/java.base/share/native/libzip/zip_util.c
I'm not familiar with zlib, but here are my .02€ :)
1610: Will be hard to beat zlib_block_alloc() and zlib_block_free() performance
wise. But have you
measured the performance gain? In other words: is it worth it? :)
1655: The result of deflateBound() seems to depend on the header comment, which
is not given
here. Could this be an issue, because ZIP_GZip_Fully() can take a comment?
1658: deflateEnd() should not be called if deflateInit2Wrapper() failed. I
think this can lead
otherwise to a double free() call.
### test/hotspot/jtreg/serviceability/dcmd/gc/HeapDumpCompressedTest.java
66: Maybe additionally check the exit value?
73: It's unclear to me, why this fails. Because the dump already exists?
Because the level is
invalid? Reading the comment I'd expect success, not failure.
### test/hotspot/jtreg/serviceability/dcmd/gc/HeapDumpCompressedTestEpsilon.java
Ok.
###
test/hotspot/jtreg/serviceability/dcmd/gc/HeapDumpCompressedTestShenandoah.java
Ok.
### test/hotspot/jtreg/serviceability/dcmd/gc/HeapDumpCompressedTestZ.java
Ok.
### test/lib/jdk/test/lib/hprof/parser/GzipRandomAccess.java
Ok.
### test/lib/jdk/test/lib/hprof/parser/HprofReader.java
Ok.
### test/lib/jdk/test/lib/hprof/parser/Reader.java
93: is the created GzipRandomAccess instance closed somewhere?
-----Original Message-----
From: serviceability-dev <[email protected]> On
Behalf Of Schmelter, Ralf
Sent: Freitag, 13. März 2020 12:43
To: Ioi Lam <[email protected]>; Langer, Christoph <[email protected]>;
Yasumasa Suenaga <[email protected]>; [email protected];
[email protected] runtime
<[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: [CAUTION] RE: RFR(L) 8237354: Add option to jcmd to write a gzipped
heap dump
Hi,
I have updated the webrev:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rschmelter/webrevs/8237354/webrev.1/
It has the following significant changes:
- The jcmd now uses two separate flags. The -gz flag is now a boolean flag
which toggles the compression on/off. And the new -gz-level flag can be used
to change the compression level. If tried to change the jlong flag coding to
allow the old behavior (only one flag, which acts both as a boolean flag and a
jlong flag), but decided against it, since it changes the semantic of a jlong
flag. And I don't expect the -gz-level flag to be used all that much.
- I no longer use my own threads. Instead I use the WorkGang returned from
CollectedHeap:: get_safepoint_workers(). This works fine, apart from Shenandoah
GC, which runs into assertions when calling the CollectedHeap::object_iterate()
method from a worker thread. I'm not sure if the assertion is too strong, but
since the GC is currently experimental, I switch back to single threading in
this case (as would be the case for serial GC or epsilon GC). Using the worker
threads removes the problems the original code had regarding destruction of the
monitor used.
- The reported number of bytes is now the one written to disk.
Best regards,
Ralf
-----Original Message-----
From: Ioi Lam <[email protected]>
Sent: Dienstag, 25. Februar 2020 18:03
To: Langer, Christoph <[email protected]>; Schmelter, Ralf
<[email protected]>; Yasumasa Suenaga <[email protected]>;
[email protected]; [email protected] runtime
<[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: RFR(L) 8237354: Add option to jcmd to write a gzipped heap dump
Hi Christoph,
This sounds fair. I will remove my objection :-)
Thanks
- Ioi
