RFR (XS) 8152957: Improve specificity of safepoint logging to print safepoint typ

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

RFR (XS) 8152957: Improve specificity of safepoint logging to print safepoint typ

coleen.phillimore
Summary: upgrade safepoint begin logs to Info logging, which has the reason.

See bug for sample.

Tested with existing jtreg tests to make sure new logging line doesn't
break anything.

open webrev at http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~coleenp/8152957.01/webrev
bug link https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8152957

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

Re: RFR (XS) 8152957: Improve specificity of safepoint logging to print safepoint typ

David Holmes
Hi Coleen,

On 20/12/2017 6:12 AM, [hidden email] wrote:
> Summary: upgrade safepoint begin logs to Info logging, which has the
> reason.

410   log_info(safepoint)("Entering safepoint region: %s",
VMThread::vm_safepoint_description());
497/504       log_debug(safepoint)("Leaving safepoint region");

You need to change the "leaving" part to info as well.

Though I'm not clear how this simple change relates to the bug synopsis
and the request to "print safepoint type" ??

Thanks,
David

> See bug for sample.
>
> Tested with existing jtreg tests to make sure new logging line doesn't
> break anything.
>
> open webrev at http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~coleenp/8152957.01/webrev
> bug link https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8152957
>
> Thanks,
> Coleen
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: RFR (XS) 8152957: Improve specificity of safepoint logging to print safepoint typ

coleen.phillimore


On 12/19/17 5:05 PM, David Holmes wrote:

> Hi Coleen,
>
> On 20/12/2017 6:12 AM, [hidden email] wrote:
>> Summary: upgrade safepoint begin logs to Info logging, which has the
>> reason.
>
> 410   log_info(safepoint)("Entering safepoint region: %s",
> VMThread::vm_safepoint_description());
> 497/504       log_debug(safepoint)("Leaving safepoint region");
>
> You need to change the "leaving" part to info as well.

I had that but it seems like extra not interestesting info.  The
safepoint stopped time is more useful and that's when we've left the
safepoint region.
>
> Though I'm not clear how this simple change relates to the bug
> synopsis and the request to "print safepoint type" ??

The VMThread::vm_safepoint_description() says why we safepoint. Which is
RevokeBias most of the time.

thanks
Coleen

>
> Thanks,
> David
>
>> See bug for sample.
>>
>> Tested with existing jtreg tests to make sure new logging line
>> doesn't break anything.
>>
>> open webrev at http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~coleenp/8152957.01/webrev
>> bug link https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8152957
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Coleen

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: RFR (XS) 8152957: Improve specificity of safepoint logging to print safepoint typ

David Holmes
On 20/12/2017 8:07 AM, [hidden email] wrote:

> On 12/19/17 5:05 PM, David Holmes wrote:
>> Hi Coleen,
>>
>> On 20/12/2017 6:12 AM, [hidden email] wrote:
>>> Summary: upgrade safepoint begin logs to Info logging, which has the
>>> reason.
>>
>> 410   log_info(safepoint)("Entering safepoint region: %s",
>> VMThread::vm_safepoint_description());
>> 497/504       log_debug(safepoint)("Leaving safepoint region");
>>
>> You need to change the "leaving" part to info as well.
>
> I had that but it seems like extra not interestesting info.  The
> safepoint stopped time is more useful and that's when we've left the
> safepoint region.

Seems unbalanced to me. And it's not clear from where the "safepoint
stopped time" actually gets printed.
>>
>> Though I'm not clear how this simple change relates to the bug
>> synopsis and the request to "print safepoint type" ??
>
> The VMThread::vm_safepoint_description() says why we safepoint. Which is
> RevokeBias most of the time.

Ah! Right.

Thanks,
David

> thanks
> Coleen
>>
>> Thanks,
>> David
>>
>>> See bug for sample.
>>>
>>> Tested with existing jtreg tests to make sure new logging line
>>> doesn't break anything.
>>>
>>> open webrev at http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~coleenp/8152957.01/webrev
>>> bug link https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8152957
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Coleen
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: RFR (XS) 8152957: Improve specificity of safepoint logging to print safepoint typ

coleen.phillimore


On 12/19/17 5:14 PM, David Holmes wrote:

> On 20/12/2017 8:07 AM, [hidden email] wrote:
>> On 12/19/17 5:05 PM, David Holmes wrote:
>>> Hi Coleen,
>>>
>>> On 20/12/2017 6:12 AM, [hidden email] wrote:
>>>> Summary: upgrade safepoint begin logs to Info logging, which has
>>>> the reason.
>>>
>>> 410   log_info(safepoint)("Entering safepoint region: %s",
>>> VMThread::vm_safepoint_description());
>>> 497/504       log_debug(safepoint)("Leaving safepoint region");
>>>
>>> You need to change the "leaving" part to info as well.
>>
>> I had that but it seems like extra not interestesting info.  The
>> safepoint stopped time is more useful and that's when we've left the
>> safepoint region.
>
> Seems unbalanced to me. And it's not clear from where the "safepoint
> stopped time" actually gets printed.

If you think it's helpful then I'll add it.  It comes from this line
closer to the end of the function.

       RuntimeService::record_safepoint_end();

thanks,
Coleen

>>>
>>> Though I'm not clear how this simple change relates to the bug
>>> synopsis and the request to "print safepoint type" ??
>>
>> The VMThread::vm_safepoint_description() says why we safepoint. Which
>> is RevokeBias most of the time.
>
> Ah! Right.
>
> Thanks,
> David
>
>> thanks
>> Coleen
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> David
>>>
>>>> See bug for sample.
>>>>
>>>> Tested with existing jtreg tests to make sure new logging line
>>>> doesn't break anything.
>>>>
>>>> open webrev at http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~coleenp/8152957.01/webrev
>>>> bug link https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8152957
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Coleen
>>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: RFR (XS) 8152957: Improve specificity of safepoint logging to print safepoint typ

David Holmes
On 20/12/2017 8:18 AM, [hidden email] wrote:

> On 12/19/17 5:14 PM, David Holmes wrote:
>> On 20/12/2017 8:07 AM, [hidden email] wrote:
>>> On 12/19/17 5:05 PM, David Holmes wrote:
>>>> Hi Coleen,
>>>>
>>>> On 20/12/2017 6:12 AM, [hidden email] wrote:
>>>>> Summary: upgrade safepoint begin logs to Info logging, which has
>>>>> the reason.
>>>>
>>>> 410   log_info(safepoint)("Entering safepoint region: %s",
>>>> VMThread::vm_safepoint_description());
>>>> 497/504       log_debug(safepoint)("Leaving safepoint region");
>>>>
>>>> You need to change the "leaving" part to info as well.
>>>
>>> I had that but it seems like extra not interestesting info.  The
>>> safepoint stopped time is more useful and that's when we've left the
>>> safepoint region.
>>
>> Seems unbalanced to me. And it's not clear from where the "safepoint
>> stopped time" actually gets printed.
>
> If you think it's helpful then I'll add it.  It comes from this line
> closer to the end of the function.
>
>        RuntimeService::record_safepoint_end();

I'd prefer it.

Thanks,
David

> thanks,
> Coleen
>
>>>>
>>>> Though I'm not clear how this simple change relates to the bug
>>>> synopsis and the request to "print safepoint type" ??
>>>
>>> The VMThread::vm_safepoint_description() says why we safepoint. Which
>>> is RevokeBias most of the time.
>>
>> Ah! Right.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> David
>>
>>> thanks
>>> Coleen
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> David
>>>>
>>>>> See bug for sample.
>>>>>
>>>>> Tested with existing jtreg tests to make sure new logging line
>>>>> doesn't break anything.
>>>>>
>>>>> open webrev at http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~coleenp/8152957.01/webrev
>>>>> bug link https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8152957
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Coleen
>>>
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: RFR (XS) 8152957: Improve specificity of safepoint logging to print safepoint typ

coleen.phillimore


On 12/19/17 5:31 PM, David Holmes wrote:

> On 20/12/2017 8:18 AM, [hidden email] wrote:
>> On 12/19/17 5:14 PM, David Holmes wrote:
>>> On 20/12/2017 8:07 AM, [hidden email] wrote:
>>>> On 12/19/17 5:05 PM, David Holmes wrote:
>>>>> Hi Coleen,
>>>>>
>>>>> On 20/12/2017 6:12 AM, [hidden email] wrote:
>>>>>> Summary: upgrade safepoint begin logs to Info logging, which has
>>>>>> the reason.
>>>>>
>>>>> 410   log_info(safepoint)("Entering safepoint region: %s",
>>>>> VMThread::vm_safepoint_description());
>>>>> 497/504       log_debug(safepoint)("Leaving safepoint region");
>>>>>
>>>>> You need to change the "leaving" part to info as well.
>>>>
>>>> I had that but it seems like extra not interestesting info. The
>>>> safepoint stopped time is more useful and that's when we've left
>>>> the safepoint region.
>>>
>>> Seems unbalanced to me. And it's not clear from where the "safepoint
>>> stopped time" actually gets printed.
>>
>> If you think it's helpful then I'll add it.  It comes from this line
>> closer to the end of the function.
>>
>>        RuntimeService::record_safepoint_end();
>
> I'd prefer it.

You got it.
Thanks,
Coleen

>
> Thanks,
> David
>
>> thanks,
>> Coleen
>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Though I'm not clear how this simple change relates to the bug
>>>>> synopsis and the request to "print safepoint type" ??
>>>>
>>>> The VMThread::vm_safepoint_description() says why we safepoint.
>>>> Which is RevokeBias most of the time.
>>>
>>> Ah! Right.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> David
>>>
>>>> thanks
>>>> Coleen
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> David
>>>>>
>>>>>> See bug for sample.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Tested with existing jtreg tests to make sure new logging line
>>>>>> doesn't break anything.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> open webrev at http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~coleenp/8152957.01/webrev
>>>>>> bug link https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8152957
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> Coleen
>>>>
>>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: RFR (XS) 8152957: Improve specificity of safepoint logging to print safepoint typ

coleen.phillimore

In case s/debug/info/ needs to be seen.  Yes, there are two places but
I'd rather leave them like they are unless there's more information
supporting moving to one place.

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~coleenp/8152957.02/webrev

Thanks,
Coleen


On 12/19/17 5:32 PM, [hidden email] wrote:

>
>
> On 12/19/17 5:31 PM, David Holmes wrote:
>> On 20/12/2017 8:18 AM, [hidden email] wrote:
>>> On 12/19/17 5:14 PM, David Holmes wrote:
>>>> On 20/12/2017 8:07 AM, [hidden email] wrote:
>>>>> On 12/19/17 5:05 PM, David Holmes wrote:
>>>>>> Hi Coleen,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 20/12/2017 6:12 AM, [hidden email] wrote:
>>>>>>> Summary: upgrade safepoint begin logs to Info logging, which has
>>>>>>> the reason.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 410   log_info(safepoint)("Entering safepoint region: %s",
>>>>>> VMThread::vm_safepoint_description());
>>>>>> 497/504       log_debug(safepoint)("Leaving safepoint region");
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You need to change the "leaving" part to info as well.
>>>>>
>>>>> I had that but it seems like extra not interestesting info. The
>>>>> safepoint stopped time is more useful and that's when we've left
>>>>> the safepoint region.
>>>>
>>>> Seems unbalanced to me. And it's not clear from where the
>>>> "safepoint stopped time" actually gets printed.
>>>
>>> If you think it's helpful then I'll add it.  It comes from this line
>>> closer to the end of the function.
>>>
>>>        RuntimeService::record_safepoint_end();
>>
>> I'd prefer it.
>
> You got it.
> Thanks,
> Coleen
>>
>> Thanks,
>> David
>>
>>> thanks,
>>> Coleen
>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Though I'm not clear how this simple change relates to the bug
>>>>>> synopsis and the request to "print safepoint type" ??
>>>>>
>>>>> The VMThread::vm_safepoint_description() says why we safepoint.
>>>>> Which is RevokeBias most of the time.
>>>>
>>>> Ah! Right.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> David
>>>>
>>>>> thanks
>>>>> Coleen
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> David
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> See bug for sample.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Tested with existing jtreg tests to make sure new logging line
>>>>>>> doesn't break anything.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> open webrev at
>>>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~coleenp/8152957.01/webrev
>>>>>>> bug link https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8152957
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>> Coleen
>>>>>
>>>
>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: RFR (XS) 8152957: Improve specificity of safepoint logging to print safepoint typ

Harold David Seigel
Hi Coleen,

These changes look good!

Thanks, Harold


On 12/20/2017 9:16 AM, [hidden email] wrote:

>
> In case s/debug/info/ needs to be seen.  Yes, there are two places but
> I'd rather leave them like they are unless there's more information
> supporting moving to one place.
>
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~coleenp/8152957.02/webrev
>
> Thanks,
> Coleen
>
>
> On 12/19/17 5:32 PM, [hidden email] wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 12/19/17 5:31 PM, David Holmes wrote:
>>> On 20/12/2017 8:18 AM, [hidden email] wrote:
>>>> On 12/19/17 5:14 PM, David Holmes wrote:
>>>>> On 20/12/2017 8:07 AM, [hidden email] wrote:
>>>>>> On 12/19/17 5:05 PM, David Holmes wrote:
>>>>>>> Hi Coleen,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 20/12/2017 6:12 AM, [hidden email] wrote:
>>>>>>>> Summary: upgrade safepoint begin logs to Info logging, which
>>>>>>>> has the reason.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 410   log_info(safepoint)("Entering safepoint region: %s",
>>>>>>> VMThread::vm_safepoint_description());
>>>>>>> 497/504       log_debug(safepoint)("Leaving safepoint region");
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You need to change the "leaving" part to info as well.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I had that but it seems like extra not interestesting info. The
>>>>>> safepoint stopped time is more useful and that's when we've left
>>>>>> the safepoint region.
>>>>>
>>>>> Seems unbalanced to me. And it's not clear from where the
>>>>> "safepoint stopped time" actually gets printed.
>>>>
>>>> If you think it's helpful then I'll add it.  It comes from this
>>>> line closer to the end of the function.
>>>>
>>>>        RuntimeService::record_safepoint_end();
>>>
>>> I'd prefer it.
>>
>> You got it.
>> Thanks,
>> Coleen
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> David
>>>
>>>> thanks,
>>>> Coleen
>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Though I'm not clear how this simple change relates to the bug
>>>>>>> synopsis and the request to "print safepoint type" ??
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The VMThread::vm_safepoint_description() says why we safepoint.
>>>>>> Which is RevokeBias most of the time.
>>>>>
>>>>> Ah! Right.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> David
>>>>>
>>>>>> thanks
>>>>>> Coleen
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>> David
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> See bug for sample.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Tested with existing jtreg tests to make sure new logging line
>>>>>>>> doesn't break anything.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> open webrev at
>>>>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~coleenp/8152957.01/webrev
>>>>>>>> bug link https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8152957
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>> Coleen
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>
>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: RFR (XS) 8152957: Improve specificity of safepoint logging to print safepoint typ

Zhengyu Gu-2
Looks good to me too.

-Zhengyu

On 12/20/2017 09:21 AM, harold seigel wrote:

> Hi Coleen,
>
> These changes look good!
>
> Thanks, Harold
>
>
> On 12/20/2017 9:16 AM, [hidden email] wrote:
>>
>> In case s/debug/info/ needs to be seen.  Yes, there are two places but
>> I'd rather leave them like they are unless there's more information
>> supporting moving to one place.
>>
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~coleenp/8152957.02/webrev
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Coleen
>>
>>
>> On 12/19/17 5:32 PM, [hidden email] wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 12/19/17 5:31 PM, David Holmes wrote:
>>>> On 20/12/2017 8:18 AM, [hidden email] wrote:
>>>>> On 12/19/17 5:14 PM, David Holmes wrote:
>>>>>> On 20/12/2017 8:07 AM, [hidden email] wrote:
>>>>>>> On 12/19/17 5:05 PM, David Holmes wrote:
>>>>>>>> Hi Coleen,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 20/12/2017 6:12 AM, [hidden email] wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Summary: upgrade safepoint begin logs to Info logging, which
>>>>>>>>> has the reason.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 410   log_info(safepoint)("Entering safepoint region: %s",
>>>>>>>> VMThread::vm_safepoint_description());
>>>>>>>> 497/504       log_debug(safepoint)("Leaving safepoint region");
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You need to change the "leaving" part to info as well.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I had that but it seems like extra not interestesting info. The
>>>>>>> safepoint stopped time is more useful and that's when we've left
>>>>>>> the safepoint region.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Seems unbalanced to me. And it's not clear from where the
>>>>>> "safepoint stopped time" actually gets printed.
>>>>>
>>>>> If you think it's helpful then I'll add it.  It comes from this
>>>>> line closer to the end of the function.
>>>>>
>>>>>        RuntimeService::record_safepoint_end();
>>>>
>>>> I'd prefer it.
>>>
>>> You got it.
>>> Thanks,
>>> Coleen
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> David
>>>>
>>>>> thanks,
>>>>> Coleen
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Though I'm not clear how this simple change relates to the bug
>>>>>>>> synopsis and the request to "print safepoint type" ??
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The VMThread::vm_safepoint_description() says why we safepoint.
>>>>>>> Which is RevokeBias most of the time.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ah! Right.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> David
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> thanks
>>>>>>> Coleen
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>> David
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> See bug for sample.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Tested with existing jtreg tests to make sure new logging line
>>>>>>>>> doesn't break anything.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> open webrev at
>>>>>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~coleenp/8152957.01/webrev
>>>>>>>>> bug link https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8152957
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>> Coleen
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: RFR (XS) 8152957: Improve specificity of safepoint logging to print safepoint typ

coleen.phillimore
In reply to this post by Harold David Seigel
Thanks Harold!
Coleen

On 12/20/17 9:21 AM, harold seigel wrote:

> Hi Coleen,
>
> These changes look good!
>
> Thanks, Harold
>
>
> On 12/20/2017 9:16 AM, [hidden email] wrote:
>>
>> In case s/debug/info/ needs to be seen.  Yes, there are two places
>> but I'd rather leave them like they are unless there's more
>> information supporting moving to one place.
>>
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~coleenp/8152957.02/webrev
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Coleen
>>
>>
>> On 12/19/17 5:32 PM, [hidden email] wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 12/19/17 5:31 PM, David Holmes wrote:
>>>> On 20/12/2017 8:18 AM, [hidden email] wrote:
>>>>> On 12/19/17 5:14 PM, David Holmes wrote:
>>>>>> On 20/12/2017 8:07 AM, [hidden email] wrote:
>>>>>>> On 12/19/17 5:05 PM, David Holmes wrote:
>>>>>>>> Hi Coleen,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 20/12/2017 6:12 AM, [hidden email] wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Summary: upgrade safepoint begin logs to Info logging, which
>>>>>>>>> has the reason.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 410   log_info(safepoint)("Entering safepoint region: %s",
>>>>>>>> VMThread::vm_safepoint_description());
>>>>>>>> 497/504       log_debug(safepoint)("Leaving safepoint region");
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You need to change the "leaving" part to info as well.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I had that but it seems like extra not interestesting info. The
>>>>>>> safepoint stopped time is more useful and that's when we've left
>>>>>>> the safepoint region.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Seems unbalanced to me. And it's not clear from where the
>>>>>> "safepoint stopped time" actually gets printed.
>>>>>
>>>>> If you think it's helpful then I'll add it.  It comes from this
>>>>> line closer to the end of the function.
>>>>>
>>>>>        RuntimeService::record_safepoint_end();
>>>>
>>>> I'd prefer it.
>>>
>>> You got it.
>>> Thanks,
>>> Coleen
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> David
>>>>
>>>>> thanks,
>>>>> Coleen
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Though I'm not clear how this simple change relates to the bug
>>>>>>>> synopsis and the request to "print safepoint type" ??
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The VMThread::vm_safepoint_description() says why we safepoint.
>>>>>>> Which is RevokeBias most of the time.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ah! Right.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> David
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> thanks
>>>>>>> Coleen
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>> David
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> See bug for sample.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Tested with existing jtreg tests to make sure new logging line
>>>>>>>>> doesn't break anything.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> open webrev at
>>>>>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~coleenp/8152957.01/webrev
>>>>>>>>> bug link https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8152957
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>> Coleen
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>
>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: RFR (XS) 8152957: Improve specificity of safepoint logging to print safepoint typ

coleen.phillimore
In reply to this post by Zhengyu Gu-2
Thanks Zhengyu!
Coleen

On 12/20/17 9:35 AM, Zhengyu Gu wrote:

> Looks good to me too.
>
> -Zhengyu
>
> On 12/20/2017 09:21 AM, harold seigel wrote:
>> Hi Coleen,
>>
>> These changes look good!
>>
>> Thanks, Harold
>>
>>
>> On 12/20/2017 9:16 AM, [hidden email] wrote:
>>>
>>> In case s/debug/info/ needs to be seen.  Yes, there are two places
>>> but I'd rather leave them like they are unless there's more
>>> information supporting moving to one place.
>>>
>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~coleenp/8152957.02/webrev
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Coleen
>>>
>>>
>>> On 12/19/17 5:32 PM, [hidden email] wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 12/19/17 5:31 PM, David Holmes wrote:
>>>>> On 20/12/2017 8:18 AM, [hidden email] wrote:
>>>>>> On 12/19/17 5:14 PM, David Holmes wrote:
>>>>>>> On 20/12/2017 8:07 AM, [hidden email] wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 12/19/17 5:05 PM, David Holmes wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Hi Coleen,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 20/12/2017 6:12 AM, [hidden email] wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Summary: upgrade safepoint begin logs to Info logging, which
>>>>>>>>>> has the reason.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 410   log_info(safepoint)("Entering safepoint region: %s",
>>>>>>>>> VMThread::vm_safepoint_description());
>>>>>>>>> 497/504       log_debug(safepoint)("Leaving safepoint region");
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> You need to change the "leaving" part to info as well.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I had that but it seems like extra not interestesting info. The
>>>>>>>> safepoint stopped time is more useful and that's when we've
>>>>>>>> left the safepoint region.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Seems unbalanced to me. And it's not clear from where the
>>>>>>> "safepoint stopped time" actually gets printed.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you think it's helpful then I'll add it.  It comes from this
>>>>>> line closer to the end of the function.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>        RuntimeService::record_safepoint_end();
>>>>>
>>>>> I'd prefer it.
>>>>
>>>> You got it.
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Coleen
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> David
>>>>>
>>>>>> thanks,
>>>>>> Coleen
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Though I'm not clear how this simple change relates to the bug
>>>>>>>>> synopsis and the request to "print safepoint type" ??
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The VMThread::vm_safepoint_description() says why we safepoint.
>>>>>>>> Which is RevokeBias most of the time.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Ah! Right.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>> David
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> thanks
>>>>>>>> Coleen
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>> David
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> See bug for sample.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Tested with existing jtreg tests to make sure new logging
>>>>>>>>>> line doesn't break anything.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> open webrev at
>>>>>>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~coleenp/8152957.01/webrev
>>>>>>>>>> bug link https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8152957
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>> Coleen
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>