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
8278282: G1: Log basic statistics for evacuation failure #6860
Conversation
|
@Hamlin-Li The following label will be automatically applied to this pull request:
When this pull request is ready to be reviewed, an "RFR" email will be sent to the corresponding mailing list. If you would like to change these labels, use the /label pull request command. |
Lgtm apart from the omission of that log message check.
I assume that it's just not worth adding log messages for the sub phases (sorting, ...) of the evacuation failure handling since we decided on the other option using the prev bitmap already. That's fine.
In any case we can always improve these messages.
@@ -265,7 +265,7 @@ private void testConcurrentRefinementLogs() throws Exception { | |||
LogMessageWithLevel exhFailureMessages[] = new LogMessageWithLevel[] { | |||
new LogMessageWithLevel("Recalculate Used Memory", Level.DEBUG), | |||
new LogMessageWithLevel("Restore Preserved Marks", Level.DEBUG), | |||
new LogMessageWithLevel("Remove Self Forwards", Level.DEBUG), | |||
new LogMessageWithLevel("Restore Retained Regions", Level.DEBUG), |
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.
Please also check the work item in this test. Needs to be added just here.
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.
Thanks Thomas, I have added checking newly added work items.
@Hamlin-Li This change now passes all automated pre-integration checks. 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 44 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.
|
Can I have another reviewer? |
/label add hotspot-gc |
@Hamlin-Li |
Can I have another reviewer? |
@@ -132,6 +132,8 @@ G1GCPhaseTimes::G1GCPhaseTimes(STWGCTimer* gc_timer, uint max_gc_threads) : | |||
_gc_par_phases[MergePSS]->create_thread_work_items("LAB Waste", MergePSSLABWasteBytes); | |||
_gc_par_phases[MergePSS]->create_thread_work_items("LAB Undo Waste", MergePSSLABUndoWasteBytes); | |||
|
|||
_gc_par_phases[RestoreRetainedRegions]->create_thread_work_items("Evacuation Failure Regions:", RestoreRetainedRegionsNum); |
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.
Based on the surrounding naming conventions, RestoreRetainedRegionsNum
should probably be sth like RestoreRetainedRegionsNumEvacFailRegions
or just the suffix NumEvacFailRegions
.
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.
Thanks Albert, I see your point.
But seems the surrounding naming convention is not that strict, and there is no uniform convention here. And to me, RestoreRetainedRegionsNum
is more friendly to read and easily related to RestoreRetainedRegions
, so I prefer to keep it as RestoreRetainedRegionsNum
.
Thanks @tschatzl @albertnetymk @walulyai for your reviews. /integrate |
Going to push as commit 93c7d90.
Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts. |
@Hamlin-Li Pushed as commit 93c7d90. |
The original pr is at #6763 , which should be retired as we have decided to adjust part of optimization solution for evacuation failure (see #6627 for details), so the log will be adjusted accordiingly.
The basic log related to evacuation failed will looks like below based on this patch.
Progress
Issue
Reviewers
Reviewing
Using
git
Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk pull/6860/head:pull/6860
$ git checkout pull/6860
Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/6860
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk pull/6860/head
Using Skara CLI tools
Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 6860
View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 6860
Using diff file
Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/6860.diff