Request for Review - 8152208: Summary for phase times are incorrect with and without UseDynamicNumberOfGCThreads
Jon Masamitsu
jon.masamitsu at oracle.com
Mon Mar 21 21:55:06 UTC 2016
Bengt,
Thanks for the review.
On 03/21/2016 02:13 AM, Bengt Rutisson wrote:
>
> Hi Jon,
>
> On 2016-03-21 03:43, Jon Masamitsu wrote:
>> The averages reported for phase times (for example "Ext Root
>> Scanning") were
>> incorrect. Not all the per thread values were included in the sum
>> and the
>> average value was incorrect (this with build 9-ea+1100)
>>
>> [0.366s][debug][gc,phases ] GC(2) Ext Root Scanning
>> (ms): Min: 0.3, Avg: 0.2, Max: 0.4, Diff: 0.0, Sum: 0.3
>> [0.366s][trace][gc,phases,task ]
>> GC(2) 0.4 0.3
>>
>> With the fix all values are included in the sum and the average is
>> correct.
>>
>> [2.830s][debug][gc,phases ] GC(0) Ext Root Scanning
>> (ms): Min: 5.7, Avg: 7.3, Max: 8.9, Diff: 3.1, Sum: 14.6
>> [2.830s][trace][gc,phases,task ]
>> GC(0) 8.9 5.7
>>
>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8152208
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jmasa/8152208/webrev.00/
>
> Nice catch! Your change looks good.
>
> The method WorkerDataArray<T>::sum(uint active_threads) just above the
> average() method has the same issue. Can you fix that too?
Yes, indeed.
I messed up the delta a bit so all the changes are in the
workerDataArray.inline.hpp
webrev. The test has not changed.
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jmasa/8152208/webrev.01/
Jon
>
> Thanks,
> Bengt
>
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> Jon
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/hotspot-gc-dev/attachments/20160321/14a0dbd7/attachment.htm>
More information about the hotspot-gc-dev
mailing list