-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 6.2k
8349906: G1: Improve initial survivor rate for newly used young regions #23584
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
8349906: G1: Improve initial survivor rate for newly used young regions #23584
Conversation
Hi all, please review this change that tries to improve the survivor rate initial values for newly expanded regions. Currently G1 uses `InitialSurvivorRate` as survivor rate for such regions, but it is typically a pretty bad choice because * it's rather conservative, estimating that 40% of region contents will survive * such a conservative value is kind of bad particularly in cases for regions that are expanded late in the mutator phase because they are not frequently updated (and with our running weights changes get propagated over a very long time), i.e. this 40% sticks for a long time * it is a random value, i.e. not particularly specific to the application. The suggestion is to use the survivor rate for the last region we know the survivor rate already. Testing: gha, tier1-7 (with other changes) Hth, Thomas
|
👋 Welcome back tschatzl! A progress list of the required criteria for merging this PR into |
|
@tschatzl 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 170 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
|
* ayang review: use actual last value instead of prediction for newly allocated survivor rate groups
kimbarrett
left a comment
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.
|
Thanks @kimbarrett @walulyai for your reviews /integrate |
|
Going to push as commit aac9cb4.
Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts. |
Hi all,
please review this change that tries to improve the survivor rate initial values for newly expanded regions.
Currently G1 uses
InitialSurvivorRateas survivor rate for such regions, but it is typically a pretty bad choice becauseThe suggestion is to use the survivor rate for the last region we know the survivor rate already.
(*) to clarify this a little: G1 keeps track of
[0...m]survivor rate predictors. For a given garbage collection,[0...n]of those are updated (nis the number of eden/survivor regions depending on the rate group). However those for]n...m]are not, particularly those in that range that are seldom allocated, the predictors are not updated very frequently. Now the young gen sizing uses these predictions "at the end" of the predictor anyway, and since they are infrequently updated and their values are very conservative, G1 won't expand young gen as much as it could/should.Testing: gha, tier1-7 (with other changes)
Hth,
Thomas
Progress
Issue
Reviewers
Reviewing
Using
gitCheckout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/23584/head:pull/23584$ git checkout pull/23584Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/23584$ git pull https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/23584/headUsing Skara CLI tools
Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 23584View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 23584Using diff file
Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/23584.diff
Using Webrev
Link to Webrev Comment