On Tue, 6 Aug 2024 07:12:13 GMT, Johan Sjölen wrote:
>> When it is said that an algorithm has the log(n) time-complexity, it means
>> that if the input grows n times, the times grows log(n) times. The tree
>> data-structure has log(n) time-complexity. VMATree may have not exactly
>> log(n) res
On Mon, 5 Aug 2024 17:20:24 GMT, Afshin Zafari wrote:
>> Why would the execution time grow logarithmically when we do linearly more
>> work? When we run this with `N2` we will perform `10_000 * log(10_000, 2)`
>> units of work, and for `N1` we will perform `1_000 * log(1
On Fri, 9 Aug 2024 10:03:52 GMT, Johan Sjölen wrote:
>> The main purpose of the `if (...)` cases is to find if the request to apply
>> the delta is valid or not. There are related assertions in VirtualMemory but
>> not so informative. Also, using `log_debug` lets the build proceed and just
>>
On Mon, 5 Aug 2024 08:42:43 GMT, Johan Sjölen wrote:
>> Yeah, that doesn't seem like a problem.
>>
>> ```c++
>> for (int i = 0; i < mt_number_of_types; i++) {
>> r = diff.flag[i].reserve;
>> c = diff.flag[i].commit;
>> flag = NMTUtil::index_to_flag(i);
>> VirtualMemory* mem = V
On Fri, 9 Aug 2024 15:05:59 GMT, Johan Sjölen wrote:
>> src/hotspot/share/nmt/regionsTree.hpp line 46:
>>
>>> 44: using Node = VMATree::TreapNode;
>>> 45:
>>> 46: class NodeHelper : public Node {
>>
>> This shouldn't inherit from `Node` and then have each instance be cast into
>> `NodeHel
On Fri, 9 Aug 2024 09:05:37 GMT, Johan Sjölen wrote:
>> Done.
>> For my curiosity, what is the advantage?
>
> 1. No malloc
> 2. No indirection, so no cache misses
> 3. A clear lifetime and clear ownership, both are bound to the `RegionsTree`
> object
OK. Thanks for your description.
--
On Sat, 12 Oct 2024 14:24:15 GMT, Johan Sjölen wrote:
>> No, returned back.
>> This assert is triggered:
>>
>> # Internal Error
>> (/home/afshin/scratch/833XX_nmt_VMT_with_tree/src/hotspot/share/utilities/growableArray.hpp:142),
>> pid=1972883, tid=1972931
>> # assert(0 <= i && i < _len) fai
On Fri, 27 Sep 2024 09:46:27 GMT, Afshin Zafari wrote:
>> src/hotspot/share/nmt/nmtNativeCallStackStorage.hpp line 93:
>>
>>> 91:
>>> 92: const inline NativeCallStack& get(StackIndex si) {
>>> 93: if (is_invalid(si) || si >= _stacks.length
On Mon, 14 Oct 2024 18:56:47 GMT, Johan Sjölen wrote:
> I think it's actually the opposite: None of the committed regions will
> survive after this function.
You maybe missed my point when said " ... some extra committed size in NMT
reports". I emphasize on the " the NMT reports", since the co
On Mon, 14 Oct 2024 12:37:05 GMT, Johan Sjölen wrote:
> Yes, but this code is incorrect. So we should have a test detecting this, but
> we do not, and so this is under-tested.
This code finds committed regions within a Stack region if they are not
accounted by NMT so far, IIUC.
By running this
On Fri, 27 Sep 2024 16:23:29 GMT, Gerard Ziemski wrote:
> Should we say then, that this is blocked by those 2 issues? Is it OK then if
> I wait till those get checked in before verifying the performance benefits if
> the new implementation? The performance was the main motivation here, correct?
On Fri, 27 Sep 2024 10:10:37 GMT, Johan Sjölen wrote:
> Sure, I can understand that it's nice to have both versions present during
> development. Right now it seems like we have a broken build, do you have any
> plans on having a functioning and fully featured build soon?
The new commit is pus
On Fri, 27 Sep 2024 11:43:19 GMT, Johan Sjölen wrote:
> Why should the default be disabled? That requires customers to explicitly
> pick the new tree to be used, which they are very unlikely to do. As I
> understand it, and correct me if I am wrong, the main goal of having two
> implementation
On Fri, 27 Sep 2024 09:49:37 GMT, Johan Sjölen wrote:
> The fork for JDK-24 is on December 5th. That means that we have at most 8
> weeks in the testing system to find and fix any bugs that we might have
> missed after integration. To me, that feels a bit short. Either we wait after
> the fork
On Thu, 26 Sep 2024 10:58:31 GMT, Johan Sjölen wrote:
> What is the consensus on having two implementations alive at the same time?
> I'd like to see us delete the old VirtualMemoryTracker and only have the tree
> implementation left as part of this PR. What is the status of our testing? Is
>
On Fri, 23 Aug 2024 21:02:25 GMT, Gerard Ziemski wrote:
> Is the plan to check-in the fix with both paths? Or are we going to remove
> the linked-list based one after the review?
The plan is to have both versions available at run-time. In this plan, we will
add JVM options to let the user to s
On Thu, 1 Aug 2024 15:44:32 GMT, Afshin Zafari wrote:
> - `VMATree` is used instead of `SortedLinkList` in new class
> `VirtualMemoryTrackerWithTree`.
> - A wrapper/helper `RegionTree` is made around VMATree to make some calls
> easier.
> - Both old and new versions exist
- `VMATree` is used instead of `SortedLinkList` in new class
`VirtualMemoryTrackerWithTree`.
- A wrapper/helper `RegionTree` is made around VMATree to make some calls
easier.
- Both old and new versions exist in the code and can be selected via
`MemTracker::set_version()`
- `find_reserved_r
On Mon, 25 Sep 2023 07:41:24 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
>> Afshin Zafari has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> new benchmark moved to vm/runtime folder.
>
> test/micro/org/openjdk/bench/java/
penjdk.org/browse/JDK-8316813) is
> created for measuring the virtual memory tracing parts of NMT.
Afshin Zafari has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
commit since the last revision:
new benchmark moved to vm/runtime folder.
-
Changes:
-
A new benchmark for measuring the NMT overhead in `summary` and `detail` modes.
The tests are run using:
make CONF=debug test TEST="micro:java.util.NMTBenchmark"
MICRO="RESULTS_FORMAT=json"
The results are written to a JSON file that can be visualized using [JMH
Visualizer](https://jmh.moreth
On Wed, 6 Sep 2023 19:56:10 GMT, Gerard Ziemski wrote:
> The test will not compile for me unless I add:
>
> `import java.util.concurrent.TimeUnit;`
Sorry, it was removed mistakenly before pushing the code. Now fixed.
> You said `The JSON file can be used for visualising the results.` Can you
On Thu, 2 Mar 2023 12:15:21 GMT, Afshin Zafari wrote:
> ### Description
> The use of `ThreadDeath` is replaced with checking the exception be of type
> `Error` and the thread is `TERMINATED`.
>
>
> ### Test
> local and mach5 tier1
This pull request has now been i
On Thu, 2 Mar 2023 17:35:35 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
>> I assumed the `ThreadDeath` was there to catch `Thread.stop()` calls and
>> just ignore them. So, I wanted to keep this functionality.
>> Can we remove using `ThreadDeath` relying on that `Thread.stop()` is also
>> deprecated?
>
> I think
> ### Description
> The use of `ThreadDeath` is replaced with checking the exception be of type
> `Error` and the thread is `TERMINATED`.
>
>
> ### Test
> local and mach5 tier1
Afshin Zafari has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
commit si
On Thu, 2 Mar 2023 14:13:10 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
>> ### Description
>> The use of `ThreadDeath` is replaced with checking the exception be of type
>> `Error` and the thread is `TERMINATED`.
>>
>>
>> ### Test
>> local and mach5 tier1
>
> test/lib/jdk/test/lib/process/ProcessTools.java line
### Description
The use of `ThreadDeath` is replaced with checking the exception be of type
`Error` and the thread is `TERMINATED`.
### Test
local and mach5 tier1
-
Commit messages:
- 8301622: ProcessTools.java compilation gets ThreadDeath deprecation warning
Changes: https://git
27 matches
Mail list logo
