RFR 8209624: [JVMCI] Invalidate nmethods instead of directly unloading them when the InstalledCode is dropped

[Tom Rodriguez]

The tests results are clean and the webrev has been updated in place 
with the change below.

tom

Tom Rodriguez wrote on 8/17/18 1:46 PM:
> The NoSafepointVerifier in make_not_entrant_or_zombie is unhappy because 
> we're in the middle of a GC.  I think it's fine to call it in that case. 
>   We just don't want a new one starting in the middle of that code so 
> I'm going to relax the GC part of the assert.
> 
>    // This can be called while the system is already at a safepoint 
> which is ok
>    NoSafepointVerifier nsv(true, !SafepointSynchronize::is_at_safepoint());
> 
> I'll send out an email if the next run is clean.
> 
> tom
> 
> Vladimir Kozlov wrote on 8/17/18 12:24 PM:
>> Tom, you have tests failed.
>>
>> Vladimir
>>
>> On 8/17/18 11:52 AM, Tom Rodriguez wrote:
>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~never/8209624/webrev
>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8209624
>>>
>>> When the lifetime of an InstalledCode instance is used to control the 
>>> lifetime of the corresponding nmethod it's possible for the nmethod 
>>> still have live activations when the nmethod is unloaded.  This is 
>>> because the weak semantics of the installed_code means it isn't 
>>> visited in the nmethod::oops_do phase.  We would have to sometimes 
>>> maintain a second strong reference which was visited in 
>>> nmethod::oops_do to make that work.  Instead simply invalidate the 
>>> nmethod and let the sweeper unload the nmethod once it no longer has 
>>> activations.  Note that this issue doesn't affect normal compiles 
>>> requested the CompilerBroker since the InstalledCode reference is 
>>> weak in that case.  The fix was tested with a Truffle program that 
>>> originally exposed the issue.  mach5 runs are in progress.
>>>
>>> tom