Quantcast

RFR(XS) [8u] 8153267: nmethod's exception cache not multi-thread safe

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

RFR(XS) [8u] 8153267: nmethod's exception cache not multi-thread safe

david buck
Hi!
(explicitly CCing everyone involved with the original JDK 9 review)

Please have a look at this very straightforward backport to 8u-dev of
Martin's fix for 8153267.

8153267 bug report:   https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8153267

8153267 JDK 9 push:
http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/hotspot/rev/95b8ce0f1228

8u backport webrev:   http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dbuck/8153267.0_jdk8u/

The only non-trivial difference between Martin's JDK 9 push and my
backport is that I also included what remained of the change for
8143897. 8143897 was pushed before 8153267 but then completely
superseded by 8153267. Specifically, I included the addition of the
"index" local (as opposed to the multiple calls to count()) from 8143897
as it will keep both code lines (8 and 9) better in-sync and also makes
the code more readable in my opinion. So you can think of the above
webrev as a combined delta of both 8153267 and 8153267.

8143897 bug report:  https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8143897

8143897 jdk 9 push:
http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/hotspot/rev/f918c20107d9

All standard JPRT tests (default and "hotspot" testsets) run and passed.

Cheers,
-Buck
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

RE: RFR(XS) [8u] 8153267: nmethod's exception cache not multi-thread safe

Doerr, Martin
Hi David,

thanks for backporting it. Looks good.

Best regards,
Martin


-----Original Message-----
From: David Buck [mailto:[hidden email]]
Sent: Mittwoch, 5. April 2017 15:38
To: [hidden email]
Cc: Vladimir Kozlov <[hidden email]>; [hidden email]; [hidden email]; Doerr, Martin <[hidden email]>; Jamsheed C M <[hidden email]>
Subject: RFR(XS) [8u] 8153267: nmethod's exception cache not multi-thread safe

Hi!
(explicitly CCing everyone involved with the original JDK 9 review)

Please have a look at this very straightforward backport to 8u-dev of
Martin's fix for 8153267.

8153267 bug report:   https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8153267

8153267 JDK 9 push:
http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/hotspot/rev/95b8ce0f1228

8u backport webrev:   http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dbuck/8153267.0_jdk8u/

The only non-trivial difference between Martin's JDK 9 push and my
backport is that I also included what remained of the change for
8143897. 8143897 was pushed before 8153267 but then completely
superseded by 8153267. Specifically, I included the addition of the
"index" local (as opposed to the multiple calls to count()) from 8143897
as it will keep both code lines (8 and 9) better in-sync and also makes
the code more readable in my opinion. So you can think of the above
webrev as a combined delta of both 8153267 and 8153267.

8143897 bug report:  https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8143897

8143897 jdk 9 push:
http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/hotspot/rev/f918c20107d9

All standard JPRT tests (default and "hotspot" testsets) run and passed.

Cheers,
-Buck
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: RFR(XS) [8u] 8153267: nmethod's exception cache not multi-thread safe

Vladimir Kozlov
In reply to this post by david buck
Looks correct to me.
I would suggest for changeset to have both bugs listed to keep track of
all fixes backport:

8153267: nmethod's exception cache not multi-thread safe
8143897: Weblogic12medrec assert(handler_address ==
SharedRuntime::compute_compiled_exc_handler(nm, pc, exception,
force_unwind, true)) failed: Must be the same

Thanks,
Vladimir

On 4/5/17 6:37 AM, David Buck wrote:

> Hi!
> (explicitly CCing everyone involved with the original JDK 9 review)
>
> Please have a look at this very straightforward backport to 8u-dev of
> Martin's fix for 8153267.
>
> 8153267 bug report:   https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8153267
>
> 8153267 JDK 9 push:
> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/hotspot/rev/95b8ce0f1228
>
> 8u backport webrev:   http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dbuck/8153267.0_jdk8u/
>
> The only non-trivial difference between Martin's JDK 9 push and my
> backport is that I also included what remained of the change for
> 8143897. 8143897 was pushed before 8153267 but then completely
> superseded by 8153267. Specifically, I included the addition of the
> "index" local (as opposed to the multiple calls to count()) from 8143897
> as it will keep both code lines (8 and 9) better in-sync and also makes
> the code more readable in my opinion. So you can think of the above
> webrev as a combined delta of both 8153267 and 8153267.
>
> 8143897 bug report:  https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8143897
>
> 8143897 jdk 9 push:
> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/hotspot/rev/f918c20107d9
>
> All standard JPRT tests (default and "hotspot" testsets) run and passed.
>
> Cheers,
> -Buck
Loading...