On Thu, 10 Oct 2024 18:47:38 GMT, Roman Kennke <rken...@openjdk.org> wrote:

>> William Kemper has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a 
>> merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains 478 commits:
>> 
>>  - Fix merge error
>>  - Merge remote-tracking branch 'jdk/master' into great-genshen-pr-redux
>>  - Merge remote-tracking branch 'jdk/master' into great-genshen-pr-redux
>>  - Merge branch 'shenandoah/master' into great-genshen-pr-redux
>>  - Merge
>>  - 8341099: GenShen: assert(HAS_FWD == _heap->has_forwarded_objects()) 
>> failed: Forwarded object status is sane
>>    
>>    Reviewed-by: kdnilsen
>>  - 8341485: GenShen: Make evac tracker a non-product feature and confine it 
>> to generational mode
>>    
>>    Reviewed-by: kdnilsen, ysr
>>  - Merge
>>  - 8341042: GenShen: Reset mark bitmaps for unaffiliated regions when 
>> preparing for a cycle
>>    
>>    Reviewed-by: kdnilsen
>>  - 8339616: GenShen: Introduce new state to distinguish promote-in-place 
>> phase as distinct from concurrent evacuation
>>    
>>    Reviewed-by: kdnilsen, shade, ysr
>>  - ... and 468 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/b9db74a6...4db1e0e1
>
> src/hotspot/share/gc/shenandoah/shenandoahFreeSet.cpp line 676:
> 
>> 674:     case ShenandoahAllocRequest::_alloc_shared_gc: {
>> 675:       // Fast-path: try to allocate in the collector view first
>> 676:       idx_t leftmost_collector = 
>> _partitions.leftmost(ShenandoahFreeSetPartitionId::Collector);
> 
> 1. The curly bracing that starts at _alloc_plab and then again at 
> _alloc_shared_gc is really really weird.
> 2. The block that is enclosed by the curly braces is really huge for a 
> switch-case.
> It probably looks better if the code can be factored out into a method and be 
> called from the switch cases? I'm not sure if this is easy to do, because 
> there are some returns and breaks sprinkled in the block, too. But this only 
> makes it worse.

https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8342001

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/21273#discussion_r1797493799

Reply via email to