is consistent (IMHO) with this behavior.
Tony
—
Tony Printezis | @TonyPrintezis | tprinte...@twitter.com
On June 22, 2018 at 7:11:05 AM, Alan Bateman (alan.bate...@oracle.com)
wrote:
On 21/06/2018 21:13, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Tony Printezis:
>
>> There are a few obvious ways
Peter,
The changes to TestMaxCachedBufferSize.java look fine. One point though:
Why do you need the TmpDirectBuffersReclamation.java test? In
TestMaxCachedBufferSize.java you just call checkDirectBuffers(0, 0); after
you the main thread calls join() on the workers?
Tony
—
Tony Printezis
I’m trying exactly that. :-)
—
Tony Printezis | @TonyPrintezis | tprinte...@twitter.com
On June 21, 2018 at 12:59:58 PM, Peter Levart (peter.lev...@gmail.com)
wrote:
On 06/21/2018 06:17 PM, Tony Printezis wrote:
I was saying: I looked at TestMaxCachedBufferSize and, unfortunately, I
…and I also hadn’t attached the test. Sorry, I’m clearly very distracted
today!
—
Tony Printezis | @TonyPrintezis | tprinte...@twitter.com
On June 21, 2018 at 12:17:57 PM, Tony Printezis (tprinte...@twitter.com)
wrote:
(I unfortunately pressed Send accidentally; apologies)
I was saying
always be 0.
Let me look into this and I’ll get back to you in a bit.
Tony
—
Tony Printezis | @TonyPrintezis | tprinte...@twitter.com
On June 21, 2018 at 12:14:24 PM, Tony Printezis (tprinte...@twitter.com)
wrote:
Peter,
Attached TerminatingThreadLocalTest.java. Let me know what you think
Peter,
Attached TerminatingThreadLocalTest.java. Let me know what you think (and
feel free to modify it / discard it if you don’t like it!).
Re: The test for the max cached buffer size is:
test/jdk/sun/nio/ch/TestMaxCachedBufferSize.java. I looked at it and,
unfortunately,
—
Tony Printezis
that, after all the threads have exited, the total
native count / size is 0).
Tony
—
Tony Printezis | @TonyPrintezis | tprinte...@twitter.com
On June 20, 2018 at 10:08:48 AM, Peter Levart (peter.lev...@gmail.com)
wrote:
On 06/18/2018 05:41 PM, Alan Bateman wrote:
>
>
> On 17/06/2
Good idea, as long as it re-uses the existing ThreadLocal infrastructure
and doesn’t introduce an extra per-thread map. Making it a ThreadLocal
subclass would be an excellent start.
Tony
—
Tony Printezis | @TonyPrintezis | tprinte...@twitter.com
On June 19, 2018 at 9:07:07 AM, David Lloyd
essentially the same issue? Apart from
that, I personally like this proposal as I agree: one look-up is always
better than two.
Tony
—
Tony Printezis | @TonyPrintezis | tprinte...@twitter.com
On June 18, 2018 at 10:13:02 AM, Martin Buchholz (marti...@google.com)
wrote:
I'm ignorin
Peter,
Inline.
—
Tony Printezis | @TonyPrintezis | tprinte...@twitter.com
On June 7, 2018 at 5:21:43 AM, Peter Levart (peter.lev...@gmail.com) wrote:
Hi Tony,
Thanks for taking a look. Just a couple of comments inline...
On 06/06/18 22:38, Tony Printezis wrote:
- instead of
Hi Peter,
Thanks for the updated webrev! Please see inline.
—
Tony Printezis | @TonyPrintezis | tprinte...@twitter.com
On June 6, 2018 at 2:55:51 PM, Peter Levart (peter.lev...@gmail.com) wrote:
Ok, here's next webrev:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~plevart/jdk-dev/DBBCache_Cl
);
return super.get();
}
One more question re: getIfPresent() (and maybe I’m overthinking this): It
returns null to indicate that a value is not present. Isn’t null a valid
ThreadLocal value? Would using an Optional here be more appropriate?
Tony
—
Tony Printezis | @TonyPrintezis | tprinte
please! :-) This will be very
helpful and can avoid completely unnecessary allocations.
Tony
—
Tony Printezis | @TonyPrintezis | tprinte...@twitter.com
On June 6, 2018 at 9:38:05 AM, Alan Bateman (alan.bate...@oracle.com) wrote:
On 30/05/2018 22:16, Peter Levart wrote:
> I thought th
Hey Alan,
Any thoughts on this? (with apologies for the ping)
Tony
—
Tony Printezis | @TonyPrintezis | tprinte...@twitter.com
On May 30, 2018 at 5:16:44 PM, Peter Levart (peter.lev...@gmail.com) wrote:
I thought there would be some hint from Alan about which of the two paths
we should
Hi all,
Any more thoughts on this? (with apologies for the ping)
Tony
—
Tony Printezis | @TonyPrintezis | tprinte...@twitter.com
On May 18, 2018 at 3:58:57 PM, Tony Printezis (tprinte...@twitter.com)
wrote:
Hi again,
Stylistically, I strongly prefer this version over the previous one
Local objects in the
array directly.
Regards, Peter
On 05/17/18 20:25, Tony Printezis wrote:
Hi all,
I have a new version of the code for your consideration:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~tonyp/8202788/webrev.1/
I basically combined our two approaches. The usage is as Alan had proposed
it: Users h
also keeps the code a bit less
verbose. I can use JdkThreadLocal directly.
Tony
—
Tony Printezis | @TonyPrintezis | tprinte...@twitter.com
On May 17, 2018 at 4:39:20 PM, Peter Levart (peter.lev...@gmail.com) wrote:
Hi Tony,
If we anticipate only small number of JdkThreadLocal(s) (there wi
easily add that functionality
if needed (I can use WeakReferences for that). However, for the uses we’re
considering, is it really necessary?
Thoughts?
Tony
—
Tony Printezis | @TonyPrintezis | tprinte...@twitter.com
On May 14, 2018 at 12:40:28 PM, Tony Printezis (tprinte...@twitter.com
arily
iterating over all the map entries (which was my main concern with Alan’s
original webrev). I’ll be totally happy with a version of this.
Tony
—
Tony Printezis | @TonyPrintezis | tprinte...@twitter.com
On May 12, 2018 at 6:44:08 AM, Peter Levart (peter.lev...@gmail.com) wrote:
Hi,
free to decide on which approach is most appropriate! :-) I’ll be
happy with any of the proposals.
Tony
—
Tony Printezis | @TonyPrintezis | tprinte...@twitter.com
On May 11, 2018 at 10:13:30 AM, Alan Bateman (alan.bate...@oracle.com)
wrote:
On 08/05/2018 16:07, Tony Printezis wrote:
> Hi
David,
Please see inline.
—
Tony Printezis | @TonyPrintezis | tprinte...@twitter.com
On May 8, 2018 at 11:44:11 AM, David Lloyd (david.ll...@redhat.com) wrote:
I'm not a reviewer, but I would ask: how sure are we that it's OK to
use lambdas from here? Is there a chance that
(jdk.nio.freeBuffersAtThreadExit) and it’s off by default. Should
I make it on by default? Or just not add the property all-together?
Tony
—
Tony Printezis | @TonyPrintezis | tprinte...@twitter.com
Hi Alan,
Ah, I hadn’t realized that there’s already some tight coupling between
Thread and nio. OK, I’ll just call into sun.nio directly and see what the
reviewers say. :-) Is there a CR for this already? Or should I create one?
Tony
—
Tony Printezis | @TonyPrintezis | tprinte
—
Tony Printezis | @TonyPrintezis | tprinte...@twitter.com
On April 6, 2018 at 12:16:10 PM, David Lloyd (david.ll...@redhat.com) wrote:
On Fri, Apr 6, 2018 at 8:57 AM, Tony Printezis
wrote:
>> ThreadLocal clearing
>
> Could you clarify what you mean by ThreadLocal clearing?
I
Was there a reason why this was not introduced in the first place?
Tony
—
Tony Printezis | @TonyPrintezis | tprinte...@twitter.com
On April 6, 2018 at 8:49:17 AM, Peter Levart (peter.lev...@gmail.com) wrote:
On 04/06/2018 10:02 AM, Alan Bateman wrote:
> On 05/04/2018 22:45, T
exists on
a Thread when I implemented my prototype. Which is why I think introducing
an exit hook on ThreadLocal, instead of Thread, is probably the better
approach (it will only be called if the ThreadLocal exists).
Tony
—
Tony Printezis | @TonyPrintezis | tprinte...@twitter.com
On April 6
Hi David,
Thanks for your thoughts. Please see inline.
—
Tony Printezis | @TonyPrintezis | tprinte...@twitter.com
On April 5, 2018 at 6:24:11 PM, David Lloyd (david.ll...@redhat.com) wrote:
On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 4:45 PM, Tony Printezis
wrote:
> Would proposing to introduce thread e
unreachable, and queue its Cleaner for
processing. I’m looking for a hook to explicitly reclaim the direct buffer
when Thread::exit is called.
Tony
—
Tony Printezis | @TonyPrintezis | tprinte...@twitter.com
On April 5, 2018 at 6:07:26 PM, David Holmes (david.hol...@oracle.com)
wrote:
Hi Tony,
On
. And it's OK if the hooks can only be used within java.base.
FWIW, I did a simple prototype of this (I call the hooks from Thread::exit)
and it seems to work as expected.
Any thoughts / feedback on this will be very appreciated.
Thanks,
Tony
—
Tony Printezis | @TonyPrintezis | tprinte...@twitter.com
(the Charset and
the requested charset name). I moved them to a superclass (StringCoder) which
made the cache easier to write (I didn’t have to create one subclass for the
decoder and one for the encoder, as it is the case in ThreadLocalCoders).
Feedback very welcome!
Tony
-
Tony Printezis
st way to do this
is (move it to a file by itself, make the class public, etc.)?
Tony
On February 25, 2016 at 4:16:32 PM, Aleksey Shipilev
(aleksey.shipi...@oracle.com) wrote:
On 02/25/2016 11:48 PM, Tony Printezis wrote:
> Has anyone identified this issue before?
Hm, there is a blast fr
re-use those? (Oh, and also note that this
cache does not use SoftReferences, which makes their use by the StringCoding
class even more perplexing.)
(a tip of the hat to my colleague Peter Beaman for discovering this issue)
Tony
-
Tony Printezis | JVM/GC Engineer / VM Team | Twitter
;>
> I think this test will be tricky to be reliable on 32-bit so the
> simplest is to just restrict it to 64-bit with:
>
> @requires (sun.arch.data.model == "64")
>
> -Alan.
>
-
Tony Printezis | JVM/GC Engineer / VM Team | Twitter
@TonyPrintezis
tprinte...@twitter.com
33 matches
Mail list logo
