RFR (XS): 8065134: Need WhiteBox::allocateCodeBlob(long, int) method to be implemented

[Igor Ignatyev]

David,

initially, we wanted to change WB::allocateCodeBlob to take jlong w/o 
truncating. for that we make CodeCache::allocate to take size_t instead 
of int, however it leads to too many changes in the product. And we were 
sure that all these changes are safe, so it was decided to make changes 
as smaller as possible.

what do you think about the version w/ check? smth like:
> public long allocateCodeBlob(long size, int type) {
>  int i = (int) size;
>  if ((long)i != size) { throw new IAE(); }
>  return allocateCodeBlob(i, type);
> }

8065134 was filled by Dmitrij Pochepko, and it's needed for his tests 
JMX tests for SegmentedCodeCache[1]. so I think he can enlighten us 
about connection.

Dima,
could you please explain connection between beans and allocateCodeBlob?

[1] 
http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-dev/2014-December/016336.html

Thanks,
Igor

On 12/08/2014 05:09 AM, David Holmes wrote:
> On 5/12/2014 10:37 PM, Tatiana Pivovarova wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> please review this new small patch
>>
>> bugid: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8065134
>> webrev:
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ppunegov/tpivovarova/8065134/webrev.02/
>>
>> Problem:
>> Need WhiteBox::allocateCodeBlob(long, int), currently only
>> WhiteBox::allocateCodeBlob(int, int) exist.
>>
>> I change previous fix to this new patch because this conversation [*]
>>
>> Solution:
>>    public long allocateCodeBlob(long size, int type) {
>>        return allocateCodeBlob((int) size, type);
>>    }
>
> I still think this is a bad idea. The callsite needs to know, and show,
> that the size it is passing will be truncated. And I still don't see a
> connection between MX bean memory sizes and allocateCodeBlob.
>
> David
>
>
>> Test: jprt
>>
>> [*]
>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-dev/2014-December/016316.html
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Tatiana