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

List:       openjdk-hotspot-runtime-dev
Subject:    RE: RFR(XS): 8241464: [11u] Backport: make rehashing be a needed guaranteed safepoint cleanup action
From:       "Doerr, Martin" <martin.doerr () sap ! com>
Date:       2020-03-25 10:09:37
Message-ID: AM0PR0202MB32973A10A60BC16458BB12D29ACE0 () AM0PR0202MB3297 ! eurprd02 ! prod ! outlook ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

Hi Coleen,

thank you for the review. Pushed to jdk11u-dev.

Best regards,
Martin


> -----Original Message-----
> From: hotspot-runtime-dev <hotspot-runtime-dev-
> bounces@openjdk.java.net> On Behalf Of coleen.phillimore@oracle.com
> Sent: Dienstag, 24. März 2020 21:09
> To: hotspot-runtime-dev@openjdk.java.net
> Subject: Re: RFR(XS): 8241464: [11u] Backport: make rehashing be
> a needed guaranteed safepoint cleanup action
> 
> 
> This change looks good.
> 
> On 3/24/20 4:07 PM, Doerr, Martin wrote:
> > Hi Lutz,
> >
> >> your change looks good to me.
> > Thanks for the review!
> >
> >> Maybe you want to add a small comment like "// Heal unbalanced hash
> >> (done at safepoint)."
> > Well, it is still a clean (partial) backport, not a new change, so I don't want to
> introduce a diff to the jdk/jdk version.
> 
> I agree. If you want to add this comment, we should have done it in the
> current version.
> 
> Coleen
> 
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Martin
> >
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Schmidt, Lutz <lutz.schmidt@sap.com>
> >> Sent: Dienstag, 24. März 2020 21:00
> >> To: Doerr, Martin <martin.doerr@sap.com>; jdk-updates-
> >> dev@openjdk.java.net; hotspot-runtime-dev@openjdk.java.net
> >> Subject: Re: RFR(XS): 8241464: [11u] Backport: make rehashing be
> >> a needed guaranteed safepoint cleanup action
> >>
> >> Hi Martin,
> >>
> >> your change looks good to me.
> >>
> >> Maybe you want to add a small comment like "// Heal unbalanced hash
> >> (done at safepoint)."
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Lutz
> >>
> >> On 23.03.20, 20:06, "hotspot-runtime-dev on behalf of Doerr, Martin"
> >> <hotspot-runtime-dev-bounces@openjdk.java.net on behalf of
> >> martin.doerr@sap.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>      Hi,
> >>
> >>      I'd like to backport a part of JDK-8221967. I'm using a new bug because
> it's
> >> only a part of the original one.
> >>      Original change has the summary "Move redundant table lookup and
> make
> >> rehashing be a needed guaranteed safepoint cleanup action."
> >>      The first part of it doesn't apply to 11u, because the SymbolTable and
> >> StringTable parts are different in 11u and I don't see the need to change
> >> them.
> >>
> >>      The second part of it does apply and makes perfect sense. Especially if
> >> BiasedLocking is disabled (11u BiasedLocking implementation requests
> more
> >> safepoints making this fix less important).
> >>
> >>      Original bug:
> >>      https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8221967
> >>
> >>      Original issue:
> >>      http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk/jdk/rev/2523496f5107
> >>
> >>      New webrev:
> >>
> >>
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mdoerr/8221967_string_table_partial_backport
> >> _11u/webrev.00/
> >>
> >>      Please review.
> >>
> >>      Best regards,
> >>      Martin
> >>
> >>


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