RFR (S): CR 8012939: @Contended doesn't work correctly with inheritance

[Aleksey Shipilev]

That assumes we would not have the bikeshed argument about the test
names and the subfolders (which we will). Really, I think it would be a
good move to move all three regression tests for @Contended at once.

-Aleksey.

On 05/16/2013 12:13 AM, Christian Tornqvist wrote:
> Seems like a trivial thing to just change 2 lines in each of the tests and
> do a hg rename? It would be more of an effort to do this later than right
> away. 
> 
> Thanks,
> Christian
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Aleksey Shipilev [mailto:aleksey.shipilev at oracle.com] 
> Sent: den 15 maj 2013 15:40
> To: Christian Tornqvist
> Cc: hotspot-dev at openjdk.java.net
> Subject: Re: RFR (S): CR 8012939: @Contended doesn't work correctly with
> inheritance
> 
> I appreciate the effort of renaming the tests, but I would not like to risk
> the integration of this change before the approaching milestone.
> Can it be made after a fact (including other @Contended regression tests).
> 
> -Aleksey.
> 
> 05/15/2013 11:35 PM, Christian Tornqvist wrote:
>> Hi Aleksey,
>>
>> Same thing here as in 8014509, could you please rename the test and 
>> put it in a folder that describes the area of the test?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Christian
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: hotspot-dev-bounces at openjdk.java.net
>> [mailto:hotspot-dev-bounces at openjdk.java.net] On Behalf Of Aleksey 
>> Shipilev
>> Sent: den 14 maj 2013 18:24
>> To: hotspot-dev at openjdk.java.net
>> Subject: RFR (S): CR 8012939: @Contended doesn't work correctly with 
>> inheritance
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> It seems we have a plenty of failures in new SQE tests for @Contended 
>> because of this. Please see the updated webrev for the issue:
>>   http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~shade/8012939/webrev.01/
>>
>> This is the minimal fix. Most of the instance_size calculations use 
>> first_nonstatic_field_offset as the boundary for the instance fields
> block.
>> @Contended on the class hijacks this boundary with padding, and so the 
>> instance size is incorrect (also evidenced by the wrong assert).
>>
>> There is also a more thorough clean up of that code:
>>   http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~shade/8012939/webrev.02/
>>
>> ...which is makes the intent cleaner. I can submit another RFE for 
>> that cleanup, although I think it prunes the source of the original
> confusion.
>> Speak up if you want me to split these, and we push the
>> webrev.01 alone then.
>>
>> Testing:
>>   - 8003985 and 8012939 tests on Linux x86_64/fastdebug
>>   - JPRT run for both webrevs
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Aleksey.
>>
> 
>