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

List:       openjdk-serviceability-dev
Subject:    Re: RFR: 8189685: need PerfMemory class update and a volatile_static_field support in VMStructs [v4]
From:       Chris Plummer <cjplummer () openjdk ! org>
Date:       2023-08-29 20:58:20
Message-ID: Pdh7HQDwRnO2M5uAuonYUpPeuItmxhcVje0EayttiRo=.193470a7-c09c-4334-9e50-d5a9180d19bd () github ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

On Wed, 23 Aug 2023 18:26:03 GMT, Chris Plummer <cjplummer@openjdk.org> wrote:

> > During [JDK-8151815](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8151815) it was noted \
> > that the PerfMemory _initialized and _destroyed fields should be volatile, but \
> > VMStructs didn't have the needed support for doing that, so it was left as a \
> > future task. @YaSuenag provided a patch at the time to take care of the VMStructs \
> > support. I've integrated it, although it was far from clean due to some changes \
> > in VMStructs, and also moving OrderAccess::release_store to \
> > Atomic::release_store. 
> > One other change I made to the patch had to do with consistency with using \
> > "volatile static" vs "static volatile". We already have volatile_nonstatic_field. \
> > The patch renamed static_ptr_volatile_field to static_volatile_field to make it \
> > more general purpose, but this was inconsistent with the name of \
> > volatile_nonstatic_field, so I chose the name volatile_static_field instead. This \
> > carried over into some other areas like the names of the \
> > GENERATE_VOLATILE_STATIC_VM_STRUCT_ENTRY and \
> > CHECK_VOLATILE_STATIC_VM_STRUCT_ENTRY macros.
> 
> Chris Plummer has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit \
> since the last revision: 
> minor comment fix

Thanks for the reviews Yasumasa, David, and Serguei!

-------------

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15373#issuecomment-1698115157


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