On Fri, 28 Apr 2023 12:48:44 GMT, Stefan Johansson <sjoha...@openjdk.org> wrote:

> Hi all, 
> 
> Please review this change to avoid CleanClassLoaderDataMetaspaces safepoint 
> when there is nothing that can be cleaned up.
> 
> **Summary**
> When transforming/redefining classes a previous version list is linked 
> together in the InstanceKlass. The original class is added to this list if it 
> is still used or shared. The difference between shared and used is not 
> currently noted. This leads to a problem when doing concurrent class 
> unloading, because during that we postpone some potential work to a safepoint 
> (since we are not in one). This is the CleanClassLoaderDataMetaspaces and it 
> is triggered by the ServiceThread if there is work to be done, for example if 
> InstanceKlass::_has_previous_versions is true.
> 
> Since we currently does not differentiate between shared and "in use" we 
> always set _has_previous_versions if anything is on this list. This together 
> with the fact that shared previous versions should never be cleaned out leads 
> to this safepoint being triggered after every concurrent class unloading even 
> though there is nothing that can be cleaned out.
> 
> This can be avoided by making sure the _previous_versions list is only 
> cleaned when there are non-shared classes on it. This change renames 
> `_has_previous_versions` to `_clean_previous_versions` and only updates it if 
> we have non-shared classes on the list.
> 
> **Testing**
> * A lot of manual testing verifying that we do get the safepoint when we 
> should. 
> * Added new test to verify expected behavior by parsing the logs. The test 
> uses JFR to trigger redefinition of some shared classes (when -Xshare:on).
> * Mach5 run of new test and tier 1-3

src/hotspot/share/oops/instanceKlass.hpp line 718:

> 716: 
> 717:  private:
> 718:   static bool  _clean_previous_versions;

Nit: I'd suggest to name it as `_should_clean_previous_versions`.
       Then the corresponding function needs to be named as 
`should_clean_previous_versions()`.

-------------

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/13716#discussion_r1182136483

Reply via email to