-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 6.2k
8331911: Reconsider locking for recently disarmed nmethods #19285
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
Closed
Closed
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
6 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
f4cdbf6
8331911: Reconsider locking for recently disarmed nmethods
neethu-prasad 5a0d556
8331911: Fix whitespace
neethu-prasad 8c5bad2
Address feedback on whitespace and comments
neethu-prasad c59034d
Update full name
neethu-prasad d474c1b
8331911: Remove is_armed check from callers
neethu-prasad 86be5b5
Merge branch 'openjdk:master' into JDK-8331911
neethu-prasad File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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 would still like this check gone, together with the comment above.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
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 agree with Neethu, though: I think we should proceed to the
DeoptimizeNMethodBarrierALotblock and cross-modify fences only when barrier acted. We know from testing that it hurts otherwise. I would prefer this change not to introduce new performance potholes, even for verification/test code.If the argument is cleanliness on who is checking "armed", and that we decide it should be solely in backend, then the middle ground might be adding the out-parameter, like
nmethod_entry_barrier(nmethod* nm, bool has_acted), and checking that before proceeding here? That feels uglier than just leaving the check here.