Request for review (s): 6814390 G1: remove the concept of non-generational G1

[Y. Srinivas Ramakrishna]

Hi Bengt -- that should also make the method checkpointRootsInitial() dead, and
thus also record_concurrent_mark_init_start() [The clue is the guarantee
you deleted in the latter method at line 940 which would be violated in the case of G1Gen
because it would be tautologically false now.] I think the dead code contagion
does stop there, as far as i could tell from a browse of the code. Perhaps a good
IDE may find you a few more dead methods, who knows...

Rest looks good to me.
-- ramki

On 8/18/2011 12:28 AM, Bengt Rutisson wrote:
>
> Hi John,
>
> Thanks for the review!
>
>> Looks good to me. You may want to consider removing the CMCheckpointRootsInitialClosure - it's 
>> only instantiated in the code you removed from concurrentMarkThread.cpp.
>
> Good point. I removed the CMCheckpointRootsInitialClosure class. Here is an updated webrev:
>
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~brutisso/6814390c/webrev.02/
>
> Bengt
>
>>
>> JohnC
>>
>> On 08/16/11 11:03, Bengt Rutisson wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> Could I have a couple of reviews for this change?
>>>
>>> Background:
>>> G1 was originally designed to be able to run in a non-generational mode. This has not been used 
>>> for a long time and no testing has been done. Thus, the code has bit rotted. We don't see the 
>>> need for this feature anymore, so rather than fixing it we should remove it.
>>>
>>> This is actually a low priority item, but since it will make my next step (supporting young 
>>> space sizing better) simpler I would like to get this CR out of the way.
>>>
>>> Webrev:
>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~brutisso/6814390c/webrev.01/
>>>
>>> CR:
>>> 6814390 G1: remove the concept of non-generational G1
>>> http://monaco.us.oracle.com/detail.jsf?cr=6814390
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Bengt
>>>
>>
>