RFR(s): 8145000: TestOptionsWithRanges.java failure for XX:+UseNUMA -XX:+UseNUMAInterleaving -XX:NUMAInterleaveGranularity=65536

[Dmitry Dmitriev]

Sangheon, thank you for clarification!

Dmitry

On 16.12.2015 19:55, sangheon wrote:
> Hi Dmitry,
>
> On 12/16/2015 06:51 AM, Dmitry Dmitriev wrote:
>> Hi Sangheon,
>>
>> Are you planning to remove excluding of "NUMAInterleaveGranularity" 
>> from testing in TestOptionsWithRanges?
> No, sorry for the confusion.
> I forgot to add that part on my webrev. When I ran JPRT, I added 
> "NUMAInterleaveGranularity" and enabled TestOptionsWithRanges.java.
> Let me include this on next webrev.
>
> Thanks,
> Sangheon
>
>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Dmtry
>>
>>
>> On 16.12.2015 3:53, sangheon wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> Could I get a couple of reviews for Windows 
>>> NUMAInterleaveGranularity change?
>>>
>>> Current Windows implementation can't handle correctly when we 
>>> reserve a heap with disjoint heap base mode with 
>>> NUMAInterleaveGranularity.
>>>
>>> Windows, os::protect_memory fails in above case, as we are trying to 
>>> protect the whole reserved heap at one time. But we reserved that 
>>> area with separate/contiguous chunks based on 
>>> NUMAInterleaveGranularity size. MSDN describes to call the API 
>>> separately.
>>> I changed protect API to be called multiple times if needed.
>>>
>>> Skipped adding a test as TestOptionsWithRanges.java is enough.
>>> 'java -XX:+UseNUMA -XX:+UseNUMAInterleaving' is enough to reproduce 
>>> on large memory Windows machine. However we need to specify heap 
>>> size if the machine doesn't have large memory. e.g. -Xms30g -Xmx30g
>>>
>>> This patch is based on the patch for JDK-8144949 which includes the 
>>> change of the max range of NUMAInterleaveGranularity to 2G(32bit), 
>>> 8192G(64bit).
>>>
>>> CR: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8145000
>>> Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sangheki/8145000/webrev.00
>>> Testing: JPRT (with TestOptionsWithRanges.java enabled), manual 
>>> tests on Windows machine(to test on large memory).
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Sangheon
>>>
>>>
>>
>