Re: RFR: 8291555: Implement alternative fast-locking scheme [v78]

2023-05-08 Thread Roman Kennke
On Fri, 5 May 2023 16:49:38 GMT, Roman Kennke wrote: >> This change adds a fast-locking scheme as an alternative to the current >> stack-locking implementation. It retains the advantages of stack-locking >> (namely fast locking in uncontended code-paths), while avoiding the overload >> of the

Re: RFR: 8291555: Implement alternative fast-locking scheme [v78]

2023-05-08 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Mon, 8 May 2023 17:04:29 GMT, Aleksey Shipilev wrote: >> Roman Kennke has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional >> commit since the last revision: >> >> Only allow lock-stack verification for owning Java threads or at safepoints > > src/hotspot/cpu/arm/c1_MacroAssemble

Re: RFR: 8291555: Implement alternative fast-locking scheme [v78]

2023-05-08 Thread Aleksey Shipilev
On Fri, 5 May 2023 16:49:38 GMT, Roman Kennke wrote: >> This change adds a fast-locking scheme as an alternative to the current >> stack-locking implementation. It retains the advantages of stack-locking >> (namely fast locking in uncontended code-paths), while avoiding the overload >> of the

Re: RFR: 8291555: Implement alternative fast-locking scheme [v78]

2023-05-08 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Fri, 5 May 2023 16:49:38 GMT, Roman Kennke wrote: >> This change adds a fast-locking scheme as an alternative to the current >> stack-locking implementation. It retains the advantages of stack-locking >> (namely fast locking in uncontended code-paths), while avoiding the overload >> of the

Re: RFR: 8291555: Implement alternative fast-locking scheme [v78]

2023-05-08 Thread Daniel D . Daugherty
On Fri, 5 May 2023 16:49:38 GMT, Roman Kennke wrote: >> This change adds a fast-locking scheme as an alternative to the current >> stack-locking implementation. It retains the advantages of stack-locking >> (namely fast locking in uncontended code-paths), while avoiding the overload >> of the

Re: RFR: 8291555: Implement alternative fast-locking scheme [v78]

2023-05-08 Thread Daniel D . Daugherty
On Fri, 5 May 2023 16:49:38 GMT, Roman Kennke wrote: >> This change adds a fast-locking scheme as an alternative to the current >> stack-locking implementation. It retains the advantages of stack-locking >> (namely fast locking in uncontended code-paths), while avoiding the overload >> of the

Re: RFR: 8291555: Implement alternative fast-locking scheme [v78]

2023-05-08 Thread Daniel D . Daugherty
On Fri, 5 May 2023 16:49:38 GMT, Roman Kennke wrote: >> This change adds a fast-locking scheme as an alternative to the current >> stack-locking implementation. It retains the advantages of stack-locking >> (namely fast locking in uncontended code-paths), while avoiding the overload >> of the

Re: RFR: 8291555: Implement alternative fast-locking scheme [v78]

2023-05-08 Thread Daniel D . Daugherty
On Fri, 5 May 2023 16:49:38 GMT, Roman Kennke wrote: >> This change adds a fast-locking scheme as an alternative to the current >> stack-locking implementation. It retains the advantages of stack-locking >> (namely fast locking in uncontended code-paths), while avoiding the overload >> of the

Re: RFR: 8291555: Implement alternative fast-locking scheme [v78]

2023-05-08 Thread Roman Kennke
On Mon, 8 May 2023 01:13:36 GMT, David Holmes wrote: > updates seem fine. Thanks! @dcubed-ojdk are you good with testing? If you could approve this PR again, I would integrate it later today? - PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/10907#issuecomment-1537901860

Re: RFR: 8291555: Implement alternative fast-locking scheme [v78]

2023-05-07 Thread David Holmes
On Fri, 5 May 2023 16:49:38 GMT, Roman Kennke wrote: >> This change adds a fast-locking scheme as an alternative to the current >> stack-locking implementation. It retains the advantages of stack-locking >> (namely fast locking in uncontended code-paths), while avoiding the overload >> of the

Re: RFR: 8291555: Implement alternative fast-locking scheme [v78]

2023-05-05 Thread Roman Kennke
On Fri, 5 May 2023 17:19:11 GMT, Daniel D. Daugherty wrote: > Slowdebug had a better stack trace: > > > > --- T H R E A D --- > > > > Current thread (0x7fe4ad0062d0): WorkerThread "GC Thread#0" > [id=19715, stack(0x74416000,0x74516000) (102

Re: RFR: 8291555: Implement alternative fast-locking scheme [v78]

2023-05-05 Thread Daniel D . Daugherty
On Fri, 5 May 2023 16:49:38 GMT, Roman Kennke wrote: >> This change adds a fast-locking scheme as an alternative to the current >> stack-locking implementation. It retains the advantages of stack-locking >> (namely fast locking in uncontended code-paths), while avoiding the overload >> of the

Re: RFR: 8291555: Implement alternative fast-locking scheme [v78]

2023-05-05 Thread Roman Kennke
> This change adds a fast-locking scheme as an alternative to the current > stack-locking implementation. It retains the advantages of stack-locking > (namely fast locking in uncontended code-paths), while avoiding the overload > of the mark word. That overloading causes massive problems with Li