RFR (XS): JDK-8013496: Code cache management command line options work only in special order. Another order of arguments does not deliver the second parameter to the jvm.

[Vladimir Kozlov]

Looks good.

For record, ReservedCodeCacheSize < InitialCodeCacheSize check is done 
correctly in check_vm_args_consistency(), not in check_stack_pages() as 
previous mail said.

Thanks,
Vladimir

On 5/7/13 1:28 AM, Albert Noll wrote:
> Hi Christian,
> thanks for reviewing. I made the proposed changes.
> Here is the updated webrev.
>
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~adlertz/JDK-8013496/webrev02/
>
> Albert
>
> On 05/06/2013 09:25 PM, Christian Thalinger wrote:
>>
>> On May 6, 2013, at 1:18 AM, Albert Noll <albert.noll at oracle.com
>> <mailto:albert.noll at oracle.com>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi all,
>>> I did the changes as proposed:
>>> 1) the added check in Arguments::check_stack_pages() checks if
>>> ReservedCodeCacheSize < InitialCodeCacheSize and
>>>     reports an error if true
>>> 2) the range check of ReservedCodeCacheSize argument only checks if
>>> the argument is >0k.
>>>
>>> webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~adlertz/JDK-8013496/webrev01/
>>
>> +  if (ReservedCodeCacheSize < InitialCodeCacheSize) {
>> +          jio_fprintf(defaultStream::error_stream(),
>> +        "Invalid ReservedCodeCacheSize: %dK. Should be greater than InitialCodeCacheSize=%dK\n",
>> Indenting is odd.
>> +                    "Invalid maximum code cache size: %s.\n",option->optionString);
>> And a space after "," would be nice.
>>
>> -- Chris
>>
>>>
>>> Many thanks for the discussions and the reviews,
>>> Albert
>>>
>>> On 05/04/2013 08:19 PM, Albert Noll wrote:
>>>> Sure, I will take care of it on Monday.
>>>>
>>>> Albert
>>>>
>>>> On 05/04/2013 04:24 PM, Pavel Punegov wrote:
>>>>> Albert,
>>>>>
>>>>> Could you please write a regression test or file an RFE for new test?
>>>>> AFAIK CodeCache management is one of the JDK8 features, so it
>>>>> should have a regression test for any product bug found. Or if
>>>>> there are no test, appropriate tag should be added according to this:
>>>>> http://wiki.se.oracle.com/display/JPG/Java+SE+Bug+Tagging+Conventions
>>>>>
>>>>> On Пт, 03 мая 2013 14:54:56 Albert Noll wrote:
>>>>> > Hi,
>>>>> >
>>>>> > please review the patch.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Many thanks in advance,
>>>>> > Albert
>>>>> >
>>>>> > jbs: https://jbs.oracle.com/bugs/browse/JDK-8013496
>>>>> > webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~adlertz/JDK-8013496/webrev00/
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Problem:
>>>>> > The order in which the arguments "-XX:ReservedCodeCacheSize=1m" and
>>>>> > "-XX:InitialCodeCacheSize=500k"
>>>>> > are given to hotspot mattered. In particular, the above order
>>>>> resulted
>>>>> > in an error:
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Invalid maximum code cache size: -XX:ReservedCodeCacheSize=1m.
>>>>> Should be
>>>>> > greater than InitialCodeCacheSize=2496K
>>>>> > Error: Could not create the Java Virtual Machine.
>>>>> > Error: A fatal exception has occurred. Program will exit.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Fix: Moved the check: ReservedCodeCacheSize >=
>>>>> InitialCodeCacheSize to
>>>>> > Arguments::check_vm_args_consistency()
>>>>> > (as suggested in the comment).
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Currently, the minimum ReservedCodeCacheSize is 1K. Any thoughts
>>>>> on that?
>>>>> --
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Pavel Punegov
>>>>
>>>
>>
>