RFR: 8343704: Bad GC parallelism with processing Cleaner queues [v12]

[Brent Christian]

On Tue, 19 Nov 2024 08:09:38 GMT, Aleksey Shipilev <shade at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> See the bug for more discussion and reproducer. This PR replaces the ad-hoc linked list with segmented list of arrays. Arrays are easy targets for GC. There are possible improvements here, most glaring is parallelism that is currently knee-capped by global synchronization. The synchronization scheme follows what we have in original code, and I think it is safer to continue with it right now.
>> 
>> I'll put performance data in a separate comment.
>> 
>> Additional testing:
>>  - [x] Original reproducer improves drastically
>>  - [x] New microbenchmark shows no regression on "churning" tests, which covers insertion/removal perf
>>  - [x] New microbenchmark shows improvement on Full GC times (crude, but repeatable), serves as a proxy for reproducer
>>  - [x] `java/lang/ref` tests in release 
>>  - [x] `all` tests in fastdebug
>
> Aleksey Shipilev has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge or a rebase. The incremental webrev excludes the unrelated changes brought in by the merge/rebase. The pull request contains 13 additional commits since the last revision:
> 
>  - Touchups
>  - Merge branch 'master' into JDK-8343704-cleaner-gc
>  - Drop --add-exports from the test
>  - prev is not needed
>  - Do not need -ea -esa in tests, our testing infra adds them already
>  - Add the node cache
>  - Avoid NPE on empty list, add tests, touchups
>  - Reimplement with segmented linked list of arrays
>  - Review feedback: make sure trimming actually works, stylistic changes
>  - Merge branch 'master' into JDK-8343704-cleaner-gc
>  - ... and 3 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/7a0b1012...dc55597d

Changes requested by bchristi (Reviewer).

test/jdk/jdk/internal/ref/Cleaner/CleanableListTest.java line 102:

> 100:         Assert.assertTrue(list.isEmpty());
> 101: 
> 102:         Random r = new Random(42);

If a constant random seed is used, the test will always run in the same way, yes?
Also, consider using `jdk.test.lib.RandomFactory`.

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

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22043#pullrequestreview-2446460553
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22043#discussion_r1848938961