[hdk8u40] Request for review (s) - 8031323: Optionally align objects copied to survivor spaces

[Jon Masamitsu]

On 08/07/2014 12:08 AM, Bengt Rutisson wrote:
>
> Jon,
>
> On 2014-08-06 19:52, Jon Masamitsu wrote:
>>
>> On 8/6/2014 2:26 AM, Thomas Schatzl wrote:
>>> Hi Jon,
>>>
>>> On Tue, 2014-08-05 at 14:07 -0700, Jon Masamitsu wrote:
>>>> This is a backport from jdk9.  The patch applied cleanly.
>>>>
>>>> 8031323: Optionally align objects copied to survivor spaces
>>>>
>>>> Add the option to specify an alignment for allocations into the
>>>> survivor spaces.  Survivor space allocations will overflow if the
>>>> survivor spaces have not been increased.   The expected use
>>>> is to align survivor space allocations to cache line sizes.
>>>>
>>>> This is the webrev for the patch from jdk9.
>>>>
>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jmasa/8031323/webrev.00/
>>>>
>>>> I made a change to the error message in arguments.cpp
>>>> here.  This change was based on a review comment I received
>>>> after the push to jdk9
>>> I would prefer if the change to the message were made to jdk9 first, 
>>> and
>>> then both changes backported to 8u.
>> Thomas,
>>
>> I will do that.  All your work to keep the jdk9 and the jdk8u sources
>> in sync (and backports easier) is very much appreciated by me.
>>
>> All,
>>
>> I'm removing the webrev_delta.00 from the code review request.
>
> That means that the backport applied cleanly, right? In that case I 
> guess you don't need any reviews to push to the 8u repo. Let me know 
> if I'm misunderstanding. If so, I will take a look at the webrev.00 
> webrev.

Yes, removing that part of the change (webrev_delta.00) means that
the patch applied cleanly.  Thanks.

Jon

>
> Thanks,
> Bengt
>
>>
>> jon
>>
>>>
>>> Otherwise it is hard to see what has already been backported and what
>>> not. (Say, by diffing the the summary lines of both branches).
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>    Thomas
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>