-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5.6k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
8329488: Move OopStorage code from safepoint cleanup and remove safepoint cleanup code #18375
Conversation
👋 Welcome back coleenp! A progress list of the required criteria for merging this PR into |
@coleenp This change now passes all automated pre-integration checks. ℹ️ This project also has non-automated pre-integration requirements. Please see the file CONTRIBUTING.md for details. After integration, the commit message for the final commit will be:
You can use pull request commands such as /summary, /contributor and /issue to adjust it as needed. At the time when this comment was updated there had been 102 new commits pushed to the
As there are no conflicts, your changes will automatically be rebased on top of these commits when integrating. If you prefer to avoid this automatic rebasing, please check the documentation for the /integrate command for further details. ➡️ To integrate this PR with the above commit message to the |
Webrevs
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Mostly looks good, with some remaining tidying up to do.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looks like a good cleanup! Do we have any data on how often and how much oopStorage needs cleaning up? Any time you go to a polling based approach there are concerns that it may be to frequent or too infrequent. What kind of applications tend to require a lot of oopStorage cleaning?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think I spotted a tiny issue otherwise this looks great!
It was previously intended to be polling too, via safepoint cleanups with the We don't want unused blocks to hang around indefinitely. On the other hand, An application that allocates lots of storage entries, uses them for a while, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looks good.
Thank you for your review and comments, Erik and David, and your review and help with this PR, Kim. |
Going to push as commit 3e9c381.
Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts. |
This patch gives the ServiceThread a periodic wakeup (same as GuaranteedSafepointInterval) to check if it needs to clean out OopStorage blocks, and move the triggering of this cleaning out of the safepoint cleanup tasks. Since ICBuffer, StringTable and SymbolTable rehashing have moved, there's nothing that actually triggers the nop safepoint to do cleaning (except SafepointALot), so the OopStorage cleanup won't be triggered.
With moving all of these out of the safepoint cleanup tasks, we can remove the code that sets up multiple threads to do safepoint cleanup. We can also remove the JFR events and logging that times safepoint cleanup, and a logging test.
Tested with tier1-4.
Progress
Issue
Reviewers
Reviewing
Using
git
Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/18375/head:pull/18375
$ git checkout pull/18375
Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/18375
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/18375/head
Using Skara CLI tools
Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 18375
View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 18375
Using diff file
Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/18375.diff
Webrev
Link to Webrev Comment