On Sat, 17 Feb 2024 02:41:20 GMT, Alex Menkov wrote:
>> The fix updates heap dumpers to report correct instance size value for
>> HPROF_GC_CLASS_DUMP records (currently it's reported as size of all instance
>> fields)
>>
>> Testing: tier1, tier2, tier5-svc
>
> Alex Menkov has updated the pull
On Sat, 17 Feb 2024 02:41:20 GMT, Alex Menkov wrote:
>> The fix updates heap dumpers to report correct instance size value for
>> HPROF_GC_CLASS_DUMP records (currently it's reported as size of all instance
>> fields)
>>
>> Testing: tier1, tier2, tier5-svc
>
> Alex Menkov has updated the pull
On Fri, 23 Feb 2024 10:08:49 GMT, Kevin Walls wrote:
> In the CSR you mention the two places we document the format. If this goes
> ahead, we should be updating them to be more specific, to declare that this
> field is not VM-independent, it has specific VM knowledge, so maybe for
> HPROF_GC_C
On Sat, 17 Feb 2024 02:41:20 GMT, Alex Menkov wrote:
>> The fix updates heap dumpers to report correct instance size value for
>> HPROF_GC_CLASS_DUMP records (currently it's reported as size of all instance
>> fields)
>>
>> Testing: tier1, tier2, tier5-svc
>
> Alex Menkov has updated the pull
On Mon, 19 Feb 2024 09:00:16 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
> > Can't the instance size as currently computed be computed by hprof tool
> > vendors using class information already present in the hprof file (list of
> > class fields and types, class hierarchy info, etc)?
>
> That would still be based
On Mon, 19 Feb 2024 09:00:16 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
> > Can't the instance size as currently computed be computed by hprof tool
> > vendors using class information already present in the hprof file (list of
> > class fields and types, class hierarchy info, etc)?
> That would still be based
On Sat, 17 Feb 2024 02:30:03 GMT, Alex Menkov wrote:
> Can't the instance size as currently computed be computed by hprof tool
> vendors using class information already present in the hprof file (list of
> class fields and types, class hierarchy info, etc)?
That would still be based on VM ind
> The fix updates heap dumpers to report correct instance size value for
> HPROF_GC_CLASS_DUMP records (currently it's reported as size of all instance
> fields)
>
> Testing: tier1, tier2, tier5-svc
Alex Menkov has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
commit since the las
On Sat, 17 Feb 2024 01:40:44 GMT, Chris Plummer wrote:
> Can't the instance size as currently computed be computed by hprof tool
> vendors using class information already present in the hprof file (list of
> class fields and types, class hierarchy info, etc)? If so, then they have
> recourse i
On Thu, 15 Feb 2024 02:45:26 GMT, Alex Menkov wrote:
>> The fix updates heap dumpers to report correct instance size value for
>> HPROF_GC_CLASS_DUMP records (currently it's reported as size of all instance
>> fields)
>>
>> Testing: tier1, tier2, tier5-svc
>
> Alex Menkov has updated the pull
On Fri, 16 Feb 2024 15:25:38 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
> > When I proposed this change 10 years ago, there was a push back:
> > https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8005604.
>
> Right, the HPROF format was created to be independent of VM or any
> configuration. So JDK-8176520 is not really a bug
On Fri, 16 Feb 2024 01:23:42 GMT, Alex Menkov wrote:
> When I proposed this change 10 years ago, there was a push back:
> https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8005604.
Right, the HPROF format was created to be independent of VM or any
configuration. So JDK-8176520 is not really a bug, instead i
On Thu, 15 Feb 2024 04:04:19 GMT, Chris Plummer wrote:
> The test is odd in a couple of ways. The first is it's in the SA test
> directory, yet is also meant as a VM heap dump test. If someone were to make
> changes to the VM heapdump code and run the VM heapdump tests, this test
> would not g
On Thu, 15 Feb 2024 13:15:51 GMT, Aleksey Shipilev wrote:
> When I proposed this change 10 years ago, there was a push back:
> https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8005604.
>
> Is it resolved now?
Thank you for the link @shipilev.
I've read the discussion, my understanding that main concern was
On Thu, 15 Feb 2024 02:45:26 GMT, Alex Menkov wrote:
>> The fix updates heap dumpers to report correct instance size value for
>> HPROF_GC_CLASS_DUMP records (currently it's reported as size of all instance
>> fields)
>>
>> Testing: tier1, tier2, tier5-svc
>
> Alex Menkov has updated the pull
On Thu, 15 Feb 2024 02:45:26 GMT, Alex Menkov wrote:
>> The fix updates heap dumpers to report correct instance size value for
>> HPROF_GC_CLASS_DUMP records (currently it's reported as size of all instance
>> fields)
>>
>> Testing: tier1, tier2, tier5-svc
>
> Alex Menkov has updated the pull
> The fix updates heap dumpers to report correct instance size value for
> HPROF_GC_CLASS_DUMP records (currently it's reported as size of all instance
> fields)
>
> Testing: tier1, tier2, tier5-svc
Alex Menkov has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
commit since the las
The fix updates heap dumpers to report correct instance size value for
HPROF_GC_CLASS_DUMP records (currently it's reported as size of all instance
fields)
Testing: tier1, tier2, tier5-svc
-
Commit messages:
- jcheck
- fix
Changes: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/17855/files
W
18 matches
Mail list logo
