RFR(S, tedious): 8217250: Optimize CodeHeap Analytics
Schmidt, Lutz
lutz.schmidt at sap.com
Mon Jan 21 17:15:52 UTC 2019
Hi all,
as said on Friday, I rebased the changeset to jdk/jdk and pushed it. The pushed version can be found at
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~lucy/webrevs/8217250.02/
It is identical to version 01 which was based on jdk12.
Thanks,
Lutz
On 18.01.19, 17:05, "Schmidt, Lutz" <lutz.schmidt at sap.com> wrote:
Thank you, Tobias!
As this enhancement will not make it into jdk12, I'll rebase it to jdk/jdk. I expect no conflicts and assume I can then push without further webrev/review.
Thanks,
Lutz
On 18.01.19, 10:49, "Tobias Hartmann" <tobias.hartmann at oracle.com> wrote:
Hi Lutz,
looks good to me too.
Best regards,
Tobias
On 17.01.19 19:39, Vladimir Kozlov wrote:
> Looks good
>
> Thanks,
> Vladimir
>
> On 1/17/19 7:47 AM, Schmidt, Lutz wrote:
>> Hi Vladimir & all,
>> there is a new webrev available: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~lucy/webrevs/8217250.01/
>> What's new (in addition to some comments) is the macro
>>
>> // Flush the buffer contents if the remaining capacity is less
>> // than the calculated threshold (256 bytes + capacity/16)
>> // That should suffice for all reasonably sized output lines.
>> #define BUFFEREDSTREAM_FLUSH_AUTO(_termString) \
>> BUFFEREDSTREAM_FLUSH_IF(_termString, 256+(_capacity>>4))
>>
>> It replaced the previous BUFFEREDSTREAM_FLUSH_IF("string", 512) occurrences.
>> Regards,
>> Lutz
>>
>> On 16.01.19, 22:53, "Vladimir Kozlov" <vladimir.kozlov at oracle.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 1/16/19 12:37 PM, Schmidt, Lutz wrote:
>> > Hi Vladimir,
>> >
>> > thanks a lot for looking at this so quickly.
>> >
>> > Sure, I could declare a specialized "BUFFEREDSTREAM_FLUSH_512" for this. The "512"
>> originated from the thought "its large enough for a well-behaved line and small enough to save
>> some flushes".
>> >
>> > I was also thinking about a "BUFFEREDSTREAM_FLUSH_AUTO", where the spare space is derived
>> from the buffer capacity, maybe something like 10 percent of the capacity, 256 bytes minimum. I
>> wasn't sure if that could be categorized as over-engineered.
>> Yes, I think BUFFEREDSTREAM_FLUSH_AUTO is better than fixed size.
>> Vladimir
>> >
>> > Your thoughts?
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Lutz
>> >
>> > On 16.01.19, 19:10, "hotspot-compiler-dev on behalf of Vladimir Kozlov"
>> <hotspot-compiler-dev-bounces at openjdk.java.net on behalf of vladimir.kozlov at oracle.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > Hi Lutz,
>> >
>> > I see that you have only one usage in all cases for:
>> > BUFFEREDSTREAM_FLUSH_IF("", 512)
>> >
>> > Can you simple declare simplified macro for this?
>> >
>> > Otherwise looks good.
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Vladimir
>> >
>> > On 1/16/19 6:52 AM, Schmidt, Lutz wrote:
>> > > Dear all,
>> > >
>> > > may I please have reviews for this (semantically) small change. Its purpose is to
>> reduce the bufferedStream buffer flushes while printing CodeHeap Analytics.
>> > >
>> > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8217250
>> > > Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~lucy/webrevs/8217250.00/
>> > >
>> > > Thank you!
>> > > Lutz
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>>
More information about the hotspot-compiler-dev
mailing list