On Wed, 17 Dec 2025 10:02:52 GMT, Joel Sikström <[email protected]> wrote:

>> Hello,
>> 
>> ZGC optimizes initialization by performing segmented clearing for objArrays, 
>> which reduces time-to-safepoint. In the lworld branch, we currently opt out 
>> of segmented clearing if the objArray being initialized is a flatArray. This 
>> prevents us from taking advantage of shorter time-to-safepoints when the 
>> flatArray could be cleared in segments.
>> 
>> The main question is: which types of flatArrays should support segmented 
>> clearing? Since ZGC only supports 64-bit atomic operations, flatArrays 
>> containing oops are not possible without relying on internal-only features 
>> like loose-consistency and null-restriction. A value object containing an 
>> oop and the added null-marker will always exceed 64 bits with ZGC, and 
>> therefore such objects will not be flattened in practice due to the 64-bit 
>> atomicity constraint.
>> 
>> Given this, we are currently missing the opportunity to use segmented 
>> clearing for flatArrays that contain only primitive types, which we should 
>> add support for. Support for flatArrays containing oops can be considered in 
>> the future, once features like loose-consistency and null-restriction are 
>> available to the user. 
>> 
>> Testing:
>> * hotspot_valhalla, jdk_valhalla, tier1-4, with `-XX:+UseZGC`
>> 
>> * Some sanity testing in lldb to see if I get segmented clearing for any 
>> flatArrays, and I can see several flatArrays containing java/lang/Integer or 
>> java/lang/Character being cleared in segmentes.
>
> Joel Sikström has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional 
> commit since the last revision:
> 
>   Offline review feedback

I pushed a new commit which fixes some asserts that were hit in the clearing 
code. And I've added a new smoke-screen test 
`test/hotspot/jtreg/runtime/valhalla/inlinetypes/FlatArrayLargeIndicesTest.java`
 which allocates primitive-only flat arrays large enough to get into the 
segmented clearing code.

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

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/valhalla/pull/1811#issuecomment-3666126484

Reply via email to