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

[Tom Benson]

Hi,

On 12/21/2015 1:57 PM, Jesper Wilhelmsson wrote:
> Hi Sangheon,
>
> I was under the impression that Tom wanted to keep the 
> UseNUMAInterleaving test and not always call 
> protect_pages_individually(). 

Yes, I'd said that was my vote, but wasn't adamant about it.  If we 
agree, let's keep it.  8^)
Tom

> At least that's what I would prefer. If you revert that change I think 
> we have something here :)
> /Jesper
>
>
> Den 21/12/15 kl. 18:48, skrev sangheon:
>> Hi Jesper and Tom,
>>
>> Here's next webrev which includes below:
>> - Check return value of VirtualQuery. (Tom, Jesper)
>> - Always call protect_pages_individually() from os::protect_memory(). 
>> (Tom)
>>
>> Webrev:
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sangheki/8145000/webrev.02
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sangheki/8145000/webrev.02_to_01/
>>
>> Test:
>> JPRT, RBT (hotspot/test/:hotspot_all,testlist,noncolo.testlist
>> --add-tonga-keyword quick for Windows only)
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Sangheon
>>
>>
>> On 12/21/2015 03:40 AM, Jesper Wilhelmsson wrote:
>>> Hi Sangheon,
>>>
>>> I like this version a lot better.
>>> I have no further comments except for what Tom already mentioned about
>>> checking VirtualQuery return value.
>>> /Jesper
>>>
>>>
>>> Den 19/12/15 kl. 00:39, skrev Tom Benson:
>>>> Hi Sangheon,
>>>>
>>>> On 12/18/2015 6:02 PM, sangheon wrote:
>>>>> Hi Tom,
>>>>>
>>>>> On 12/17/2015 04:23 PM, sangheon wrote:
>>>>>> Hi Tom,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thank you for reviewing this!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 12/17/2015 01:28 PM, Tom Benson wrote:
>>>>>>> Hi Sangheon,
>>>>>>> I like the new approach, but just have a couple of comments.
>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I think you should check the VirtualQuery return status and 
>>>>>>> return false
>>>>>>> from protect_pages_individually if zero.
>>>>>> Right.
>>>>>> I will fix this.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I don't *think* you need to have the "!UseLargePages" 
>>>>>>> restriction anymore
>>>>>>> with this approach, do you?
>>>>>> protect_pages_individually() doesn't have previous restriction on 
>>>>>> its usage.
>>>>>> However I wanted to remain the caller(os::protect_memory) as is 
>>>>>> because, as
>>>>>> you already mentioned below, I didn't want to have an additional 
>>>>>> call of
>>>>>> VirtualQuery() for simpler code.
>>>>>> I don't have strong opinion on this.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Let me post next webrev after concluding this.
>>>>> Tom, do you prefer to always use protect_pages_individually()?
>>>>> Does anyone have opinion on this?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I'd vote for leaving the UseNUMAInterleaving test in.
>>>> Tom
>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Sangheon
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> Sangheon
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Actually, I think you could just always use 
>>>>>>> protect_pages_individually
>>>>>>> regardless of whether UseNUMAInterleaving was enabled or not, 
>>>>>>> and the right
>>>>>>> thing would happen.  But this way, you save an unnecessary 
>>>>>>> system call plus
>>>>>>> some overhead.
>>>>>>> Tom
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>
>>