RFR(S): 8142341: GC: current flags need ranges to be implemented

[Dmitry Dmitriev]

Hi Sangheon,

Updated version also looks good to me!

Thanks,
Dmitry

On 26.11.2015 2:00, sangheon.kim wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Here's updated webrev which reflects changes by "JDK-8143038: 
> [TESTBUG] TestOptionsWithRanges: allow excluding only a subset of 
> tested values specified for a flag".
>
> The only updated file is 
> test/runtime/CommandLine/OptionsValidation/TestOptionsWithRanges.java.
> Changed from "allOptionsAsMap.remove("flag name")" to 
> "excludeTestMaxRange("flag name")".
>
> FYI,  JDK-8143038 introduced separated exclude methods of 
> "excludeTest, excludeTestMaxRange and excludeTestMinRange".
>
> webrev:
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sangheki/8142341/webrev.01/
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sangheki/8142341/webrev.01_to_00/
>
> Thanks,
> Sangheon
>
>
> On 11/24/2015 06:37 AM, sangheon.kim wrote:
>> Hi Dmitry,
>>
>> Thank you for the review!
>> Sure I will update my patch related to your enhancement.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Sangheon
>>
>>
>> On 11/24/2015 06:30 AM, Dmitry Dmitriev wrote:
>>> Hi Sangheon,
>>>
>>> Looks good to me! Thank you for fixing that. I hope that enhancement 
>>> will be pushed today(currently in JPRT queue), so please update your 
>>> patch after that!
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Dmitry
>>>
>>> On 21.11.2015 0:04, sangheon.kim wrote:
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> Could I have a couple of reviews for this change to add explicit 
>>>> 'range' for flags?
>>>>
>>>> Previously, we added 'range' when it is needed to avoid 
>>>> assert/crash but now explicit 'range' are needed for all flags.
>>>> All flags should have 'range' or 'constraint' at least.
>>>>
>>>> CR: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8142341
>>>> Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sangheki/8142341/webrev.00
>>>> Testing: JPRT, RBT 
>>>> (hotspot/test/:hotspot_all,testlist,noncolo.testlist 
>>>> --add-tonga-keyword quick), hotspot/test/runtime/CommandLine for 
>>>> embedded
>>>>
>>>> * Summary
>>>> 1. Added 3 new constraint functions.
>>>>    1) HeapBaseMinAddress: Added to avoid an overflow after align up 
>>>> and this flag makes hang up without constraint function. (newly 
>>>> added as a part of GC work)
>>>>    2) TLABWasteIncrement: Without this constraint function we don't 
>>>> have problems (even many GCs happen). But added to avoid an 
>>>> overflow at ThreadLocalAllocBuffer::record_slow_allocation(). There 
>>>> are also separate CR for this overflow ( JDK-8143352 ).
>>>>    3) NUMAInterleaveGranularity: Added to avoid an overflow after 
>>>> align up.
>>>>
>>>> 2. Some flags have narrower range than their type.
>>>>    1) Here's the reason why some flags should have different range. 
>>>> (same order from globals.hpp)
>>>> {flag type} {flag name}: (range), {comment}
>>>> size_t NUMAInterleaveGranularity: (os::vm_allocation_granularity(), 
>>>> max_uintx), there is a comment at numa_interleaving_init() that 
>>>> this flag should be larger than vm_allocation_granularity().
>>>> uintx CMSOldPLABReactivityFactor: (1,max_uintx), couldn't be zero 
>>>> as used for multiplication
>>>> uintx CMS_FLSPadding: (0, max_juint), used to set a function which 
>>>> has 'unsigned int' type input parameter.
>>>> uintx CMS_SweepPadding: (0, max_juint), used to set a function 
>>>> which has 'unsigned int' type input parameter.
>>>> intx CMSWaitDuration: (min_jint, max_jint), used to set a function 
>>>> which has 'long' type input parameter.
>>>> uintx PausePadding: (0, max_juint), used to set a function which 
>>>> has 'unsigned int' type input parameter.
>>>> uintx PromotedPadding: (0, max_juint), used to set a function which 
>>>> has 'unsigned int' type input parameter.
>>>> uintx SurvivorPadding: (0, max_juint), used to set a function which 
>>>> has 'unsigned int' type input parameter.
>>>> uintx AdaptiveSizePolicyCollectionCostMargin: (0, 100), as this 
>>>> flag is divided by 100 I assume this is percentage.
>>>> uintx GCTimeRatio: (0, max_juint), used to set a function which has 
>>>> 'unsigned int' type input parameter.
>>>> intx PrefetchCopyIntervalInBytes: (-1, max_jint)
>>>> intx PrefetchScanIntervalInBytes:  (-1, max_jint)
>>>> intx PrefetchFieldsAhead:  (-1, max_jint), I think these 3 
>>>> Prefetch* flags should have same upper limit and looking at their 
>>>> related codes 'max_jint' seems appropriate ( no problem with 
>>>> 'max_jint' during testing). However, as Prefetch::read/write() 
>>>> needs 'intx', 'intx' also seems good but we have to fix some codes 
>>>> (maybe including generated codes).
>>>> uintx CPUForCMSThread: (0, max_juint), used to set a function which 
>>>> has 'unsigned int' type input parameter.
>>>> uintx ProcessDistributionStride: (0, max_juint), used to set uint 
>>>> variable and used 'for loop' which has uint increment. i.e. for 
>>>> (uint i=0; i<ProcessDistributionStride; i++)
>>>> uintx CMSCoordinatorYieldSleepCount: (0, max_juint), used at 
>>>> 'increment for loop()' as max value and the increment is uint.
>>>> uintx CMSYieldSleepCount: (0, max_juint),  used at 'increment for 
>>>> loop()' as max value and the increment is uint.
>>>> uintx TLABRefillWasteFraction: (1, max_juint), used as a return 
>>>> value of uint type function and for division. i.e. uint 
>>>> GCTLABConfiguration::tlab_refill_waste_limit()() { return 
>>>> TLABRefillWasteFraction; }
>>>> uintx TLABWasteIncrement: (0, max_jint), type cast to (int)
>>>> intx PrintCMSStatistics: (0,2), flag to choose print mode and we 
>>>> only use " if (a !=0, >0, >1)".
>>>> intx PrintFLSStatistics: (0,2), flag to choose print mode and we 
>>>> only use " if (a !=0, >0, >1)".
>>>> intx PrintFLSCensus: (0,1), flag to choose print mode and we only 
>>>> use " if (a !=0, >0)".
>>>> uintx GCDrainStackTargetSize: (0, max_juint), type cast to 
>>>> 'unsigned int'
>>>>
>>>> (g1_globals.hpp)
>>>> intx G1ConcRefinementThresholdStep: (0, max_jint), used to set 
>>>> (int) type variable.
>>>>
>>>> 3. Excluded flags from TestOptionsWithRanges.java
>>>> 1) Memory and thread related flags: tests for these flags will 
>>>> consume too many resources from the system.
>>>> 2) VMThreadStackSize: range work for this flag is not included in 
>>>> this patch but I faced OOME several times, so excluded.
>>>>
>>>> * I will reflect Dmitry's enhancement(JDK-8143038: [TESTBUG] 
>>>> TestOptionsWithRanges: allow excluding only a subset of tested 
>>>> values specified for a flag) next time.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Sangheon
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>