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

8267666: Add option to jcmd GC.heap_dump to use existing file #131

Closed

Conversation

RealCLanger
Copy link
Contributor

@RealCLanger RealCLanger commented Jul 13, 2021

Backport of the heap dump enhancement. CSR includes update releases.

Patch did not apply cleanly, I had to resolve/modify
src/hotspot/share/services/diagnosticCommand.cpp
src/hotspot/share/services/diagnosticCommand.hpp
src/hotspot/share/services/heapDumper.cpp
src/hotspot/share/services/heapDumper.hpp

Following files do not exist in 11u:
src/hotspot/share/services/heapDumperCompression.cpp
src/hotspot/share/services/heapDumperCompression.hpp
Changes had been made in heapDumper.cpp/heapDumper.hpp

I have built it on linuxx86_64 and verified that the modified test succeeds. Will also run it through SAP's test suite before merging.


Progress

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

Issue

  • JDK-8267666: Add option to jcmd GC.heap_dump to use existing file

Reviewers

Reviewing

Using git

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk11u-dev pull/131/head:pull/131
$ git checkout pull/131

Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/131
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk11u-dev pull/131/head

Using Skara CLI tools

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 131

View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 131

Using diff file

Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk11u-dev/pull/131.diff

@bridgekeeper
Copy link

@bridgekeeper bridgekeeper bot commented Jul 13, 2021

👋 Welcome back clanger! 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.

@openjdk openjdk bot changed the title Backport 7cbb67a3f8adc83a5b51c092a66480d7b22a6bea 8267666: Add option to jcmd GC.heap_dump to use existing file Jul 13, 2021
@openjdk
Copy link

@openjdk openjdk bot commented Jul 13, 2021

This backport pull request has now been updated with issue from the original commit.

@openjdk openjdk bot added backport rfr labels Jul 13, 2021
@mlbridge
Copy link

@mlbridge mlbridge bot commented Jul 13, 2021

Webrevs

Copy link
Contributor

@schmelter-sap schmelter-sap left a comment

Looks good to me.

GoeLin
GoeLin approved these changes Jul 14, 2021
Copy link
Member

@GoeLin GoeLin left a comment

LGTM

@openjdk
Copy link

@openjdk openjdk bot commented Jul 14, 2021

@RealCLanger This change now passes all automated pre-integration checks.

After integration, the commit message for the final commit will be:

8267666: Add option to jcmd GC.heap_dump to use existing file

Reviewed-by: rschmelter, goetz, stuefe

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 no new commits pushed to the master branch. If another commit should be pushed before you perform the /integrate command, your PR will be automatically rebased. If you prefer to avoid any potential 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 label Jul 14, 2021
Copy link
Member

@tstuefe tstuefe left a comment

+1

@AntonKozlov
Copy link
Member

@AntonKozlov AntonKozlov commented Jul 14, 2021

Don't we need https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8234510 to be backported as well? Just want to be sure, since I see DumpWriter::seek_to_offset in the source code, and it is used.

@schmelter-sap
Copy link
Contributor

@schmelter-sap schmelter-sap commented Jul 14, 2021

To be able to use the -overwrite flag for domain sockets or pipes this would be needed, but overwriting an existing file would work.

I had not backported my change to 11, because the diff between 15 and 11 was large and it wasn't a bugfix, so not strictly needed. But if there is interest, it should be possible.

@RealCLanger
Copy link
Contributor Author

@RealCLanger RealCLanger commented Jul 14, 2021

To be able to use the -overwrite flag for domain sockets or pipes this would be needed, but overwriting an existing file would work.

I had not backported my change to 11, because the diff between 15 and 11 was large and it wasn't a bugfix, so not strictly needed. But if there is interest, it should be possible.

Hm, together with this change actually https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8234510 seems more worthwhile to do. Maybe you want to look into bringing it to JDK11 now, @schmelter-sap? In any case, this backport seems to be good as is and does not need JDK-8234510 as a prerequisite, though its use is limited for the moment.

@schmelter-sap
Copy link
Contributor

@schmelter-sap schmelter-sap commented Jul 15, 2021

Hm, together with this change actually https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8234510 seems more worthwhile to do. Maybe you want to look into bringing it to JDK11 now, @schmelter-sap? In any case, this backport seems to be good as is and does not need JDK-8234510 as a prerequisite, though its use is limited for the moment.

Yes, it would make sense to downport it now, since we now have an actual use for it.

@buddyliao
Copy link
Contributor

@buddyliao buddyliao commented Jul 19, 2021

Hm, together with this change actually https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8234510 seems more worthwhile to do. Maybe you want to look into bringing it to JDK11 now, @schmelter-sap? In any case, this backport seems to be good as is and does not need JDK-8234510 as a prerequisite, though its use is limited for the moment.

Yes, it would make sense to downport it now, since we now have an actual use for it.

I had backport your patch(JDK-8234510 ) here #134
Would you help me to review it? Thank you.

@RealCLanger
Copy link
Contributor Author

@RealCLanger RealCLanger commented Jul 23, 2021

/integrate

@openjdk
Copy link

@openjdk openjdk bot commented Jul 23, 2021

Going to push as commit 6762216.
Since your change was applied there have been 38 commits pushed to the master branch:

  • 63c4ec2: 8259535: ECDSA SignatureValue do not always have the specified length
  • 133eca0: 8235211: serviceability/attach/RemovingUnixDomainSocketTest.java fails with AttachNotSupportedException: Unable to open socket file
  • 7501084: 8268965: TCP Connection Reset when connecting simple socket to SSL server
  • d78e2be: 8227738: jvmti/DataDumpRequest/datadumpreq001 failed due to "exit code is 134"
  • 8637f65: 8227815: Minimal VM: set_state is not a member of AttachListener
  • f3098c4: 8225690: Multiple AttachListener threads can be created
  • 2b3a641: 8245134: test/lib/jdk/test/lib/security/KeyStoreUtils.java should allow to specify aliases
  • 8f49220: 8206350: java/util/Locale/bcp47u/SystemPropertyTests.java failed on Mac 10.13 with zh_CN and zh_TW locales.
  • deba308: 8206083: Make tools/javac/api/T6265137.java robust to JDK version changes
  • cbce000: Merge
  • ... and 28 more: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk11u-dev/compare/23918db4b7e65797318ec5f5c5a452ec9d3ea0c5...master

Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts.

@openjdk openjdk bot closed this Jul 23, 2021
@openjdk openjdk bot added integrated and removed ready rfr labels Jul 23, 2021
@openjdk
Copy link

@openjdk openjdk bot commented Jul 23, 2021

@RealCLanger Pushed as commit 6762216.

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

@RealCLanger RealCLanger deleted the RealCLanger-backport-7cbb67a3 branch Jul 23, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
backport integrated
6 participants