[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       openjdk-hotspot-runtime-dev
Subject:    Re: Fwd: RFR: 8158946 - btree009 fails with assert(s > 0) failed: Bad size calculated
From:       Coleen Phillimore <coleen.phillimore () oracle ! com>
Date:       2016-06-30 23:17:21
Message-ID: c2ade18f-db59-f1fb-4c2e-181ea36a53a5 () oracle ! com
[Download RAW message or body]


http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~drwhite/8158946/webrev.04/src/share/vm/classfile/javaClasses.hpp.udiff.html
 http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~drwhite/8158946/webrev.04/src/share/vm/gc/cms/concurrentMarkSweepGeneration.cpp.udiff.html


Since there are no changes, can you hg revert thes file?

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~drwhite/8158946/webrev.04/src/share/vm/oops/instanceMirrorKlass.cpp.udiff.html


Wow, what a small race!

Nice fix.  The code looks good.

Coleen


On 6/30/16 5:15 PM, Derek White wrote:
> New webrev goes back to using java_lang_Class::set_oop_size(new_cls, 
> size);
> 
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~drwhite/8158946/webrev.04/
> 
> jprt run in progress. Built w/ and w/o PCH.
> 
> On 6/30/16 7:56 AM, Derek White wrote:
> > On 6/30/16 12:28 AM, David Holmes wrote:
> > > Hi Derek,
> > > 
> > > Understand the fix in principle.
> > > 
> > > But I don't understand why you got rid of 
> > > java_lang_Class::set_oop_size, and instead exposed 
> > > java_lang_Class::oop_size_offset(), then had 
> > > InstanceMirrorKlass::allocate_instance pass the offset to 
> > > CollectedHeap::class_allocate, which passes it to 
> > > CollectedHeap::post_allocation_setup_class - that seems rather 
> > > convoluted. Can CollectedHeap::post_allocation_setup_class not call 
> > > java_lang_Class::set_oop_size directly?
> > 
> > Short answer is I didn't think so. collectedHeap.inline.hpp has a 
> > very small include set, and I was concerned about circular 
> > dependencies. Another approach would be to push ::set_oop_size() over 
> > to instanceKlassMirror.hpp, and see if the includes seem saner that 
> > way. I'll try some alternatives...
> 
> OK, doing the simple and obvious thing worked out after all. Thanks 
> David!
> 
> - Derek


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]