RFR: 8182284: G1Analytics uses uninitialized fields

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
3 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RFR: 8182284: G1Analytics uses uninitialized fields

Erik Helin-2
Hi all,

this small patch just initializes two uninitialized fields in
G1Analytics. 0.0 is a good enough as starting value, the fields are not
meant to be read before a GC has been run (but if this would happen,
observing 0.0 fits together with the calculations that the values
represents).

Bug:
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8182284

Webrev:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ehelin/8182284/00/

Testing:
- Mach5 hs-tier1,hs-tier2
- Newly added unit test

Thanks,
Erik
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: RFR: 8182284: G1Analytics uses uninitialized fields

Thomas Schatzl
Hi,

On Tue, 2017-11-21 at 09:02 +0100, Erik Helin wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> this small patch just initializes two uninitialized fields in
> G1Analytics. 0.0 is a good enough as starting value, the fields are
> not
> meant to be read before a GC has been run (but if this would happen,
> observing 0.0 fits together with the calculations that the values
> represents).
>
> Bug:
> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8182284
>
> Webrev:
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ehelin/8182284/00/
>

  looks good.

Thomas

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: RFR: 8182284: G1Analytics uses uninitialized fields

Stefan Johansson
In reply to this post by Erik Helin-2


On 2017-11-21 09:02, Erik Helin wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> this small patch just initializes two uninitialized fields in
> G1Analytics. 0.0 is a good enough as starting value, the fields are
> not meant to be read before a GC has been run (but if this would
> happen, observing 0.0 fits together with the calculations that the
> values represents).
>
> Bug:
> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8182284
>
> Webrev:
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ehelin/8182284/00/
>
Looks good,
Stefan
> Testing:
> - Mach5 hs-tier1,hs-tier2
> - Newly added unit test
>
> Thanks,
> Erik