Skip to content
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

8264941: Remove CodeCache::mark_for_evol_deoptimization() method #4509

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

coleenp
Copy link
Contributor

@coleenp coleenp commented Jun 16, 2021

This change removes the mark_for_evol_deoptimization method and removes the flag that all dependencies are recorded. Before the change to walk the entire nmethod looking for "old" (redefined) methods with metadata_do(), we used to find methods in the code cache to deoptimize based on evol_method dependencies. If the dependencies weren't yet recorded, we had to deoptimize all of the methods. A long time ago, we had a customer who was unhappy with the pause for this when they had late attach. Now we don't have this problem.
The evol_method dependencies are still used by the compiler to check for old methods during compilation. I didn't change this but it might be something someone who knows the compiler better can do differently and remove these dependencies too.
Tested with tier1-6.


Progress

  • Change must not contain extraneous whitespace
  • Commit message must refer to an issue
  • Change must be properly reviewed

Issue

  • JDK-8264941: Remove CodeCache::mark_for_evol_deoptimization() method

Reviewers

Reviewing

Using git

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk pull/4509/head:pull/4509
$ git checkout pull/4509

Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/4509
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk pull/4509/head

Using Skara CLI tools

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 4509

View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 4509

Using diff file

Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/4509.diff

@bridgekeeper
Copy link

bridgekeeper bot commented Jun 16, 2021

👋 Welcome back coleenp! A progress list of the required criteria for merging this PR into master will be added to the body of your pull request. There are additional pull request commands available for use with this pull request.

@coleenp
Copy link
Contributor Author

coleenp commented Jun 16, 2021

/assign vladimir.x.ivanov@oracle.com

@openjdk openjdk bot added the rfr Pull request is ready for review label Jun 16, 2021
@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Jun 16, 2021

@coleenp Unknown command assign - for a list of valid commands use /help.

@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Jun 16, 2021

@coleenp The following labels will be automatically applied to this pull request:

  • hotspot
  • serviceability

When this pull request is ready to be reviewed, an "RFR" email will be sent to the corresponding mailing lists. If you would like to change these labels, use the /label pull request command.

@openjdk openjdk bot added serviceability serviceability-dev@openjdk.org hotspot hotspot-dev@openjdk.org labels Jun 16, 2021
@mlbridge
Copy link

mlbridge bot commented Jun 16, 2021

Webrevs

@coleenp
Copy link
Contributor Author

coleenp commented Jun 16, 2021

/help

@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Jun 16, 2021

@coleenp Available commands:

  • cc - add or remove an additional classification label
  • clean - Mark the backport pull request as a clean backport
  • contributor - adds or removes additional contributors for a PR
  • covered - used when employer has signed the OCA
  • csr - require a compatibility and specification request (CSR) for this pull request
  • help - shows this text
  • integrate - performs integration of the changes in the PR
  • issue - edit the list of issues that this PR solves
  • label - add or remove an additional classification label
  • open - Set the pull request state to "open"
  • reviewer - manage additional reviewers for a PR
  • reviewers - set the number of additional required reviewers for this PR
  • signed - used after signing the OCA
  • solves - edit the list of issues that this PR solves
  • sponsor - performs integration of a PR that is authored by a non-committer
  • summary - updates the summary in the commit message
  • test - used to run tests

@coleenp
Copy link
Contributor Author

coleenp commented Jun 16, 2021

Hi @iwanowww can you have a look?

Copy link
Member

@eastig eastig left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

@coleenp
Copy link
Contributor Author

coleenp commented Jun 16, 2021

Thanks @eastig .

Copy link
Contributor

@vnkozlov vnkozlov left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Good.

@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Jun 17, 2021

@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:

8264941: Remove CodeCache::mark_for_evol_deoptimization() method

Reviewed-by: kvn, vlivanov, sspitsyn

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 68 new commits pushed to the master branch:

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 master branch, type /integrate in a new comment.

@openjdk openjdk bot added the ready Pull request is ready to be integrated label Jun 17, 2021
Copy link

@iwanowww iwanowww left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good.

@coleenp
Copy link
Contributor Author

coleenp commented Jun 21, 2021

/reviewer add @sspitsyn

@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Jun 21, 2021

@coleenp Syntax: /reviewer (credit|remove) [@user | openjdk-user]+. For example:

  • /reviewer credit @openjdk-bot
  • /reviewer credit duke
  • /reviewer credit @user1 @user2

@coleenp
Copy link
Contributor Author

coleenp commented Jun 21, 2021

Thank you both Vladimir.

Copy link
Contributor

@sspitsyn sspitsyn left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Hi Coleen,
LGTM.
Thanks,
Serguei

@coleenp
Copy link
Contributor Author

coleenp commented Jun 22, 2021

Thanks Serguei. Thanks for the code reviews.
/integrate

@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Jun 22, 2021

Going to push as commit 33c23a1.
Since your change was applied there have been 79 commits pushed to the master branch:

  • 18a1dd2: 8269031: linux x86_64 check for binutils 2.25 or higher after 8265783
  • 2e639dd: 8267657: Add missing PrintC1Statistics before incrementing counters
  • 1f0ea7c: 8268857: Merge VM_PrintJNI and VM_PrintThreads and remove the unused field 'is_deadlock' of DeadlockCycle
  • 1a81815: 8269077: TestSystemGC uses "require vm.gc.G1" for large pages subtest
  • 0458113: Merge
  • d3ad8cd: 8268672: C2: assert(!loop->is_member(u_loop)) failed: can be in outer loop or out of both loops only
  • f25e719: 8268717: Upstream: 8268673: Stack walk across optimized entry frame on fresh native thread fails
  • 22ebd19: 8268362: [REDO] C2 crash when compile negative Arrays.copyOf length after loop
  • f8df953: 8268702: JFR diagnostic commands lack argument descriptors when viewed using Platform MBean Server
  • c294ae4: 8267042: bug in monitor locking/unlocking on ARM32 C1 due to uninitialized BasicObjectLock::_displaced_header
  • ... and 69 more: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/compare/72b3b0af08136342e54e1cdea0c48d64172e8870...master

Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts.

@openjdk openjdk bot closed this Jun 22, 2021
@openjdk openjdk bot added integrated Pull request has been integrated and removed ready Pull request is ready to be integrated labels Jun 22, 2021
@coleenp coleenp deleted the evol-deopt branch June 22, 2021 16:09
@openjdk openjdk bot removed the rfr Pull request is ready for review label Jun 22, 2021
@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Jun 22, 2021

@coleenp Pushed as commit 33c23a1.

💡 You may see a message that your pull request was closed with unmerged commits. This can be safely ignored.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
hotspot hotspot-dev@openjdk.org integrated Pull request has been integrated serviceability serviceability-dev@openjdk.org
5 participants