RFR (M): 8077144: Concurrent mark initialization takes too long

[Thomas Schatzl]

Hi Kim,

On Tue, 2016-03-29 at 20:41 -0400, Kim Barrett wrote:
> > On Mar 29, 2016, at 5:06 AM, Thomas Schatzl <
> > thomas.schatzl at oracle.com> wrote:
> > 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > On Fri, 2016-03-25 at 21:48 -0400, Kim Barrett wrote:
> > > > On Mar 25, 2016, at 9:38 PM, Kim Barrett <
> > > > kim.barrett at oracle.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > On Mar 15, 2016, at 6:12 PM, Thomas Schatzl <
> > > > > thomas.schatzl at oracle.com> wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > Hi Mikael,
> > > > > 
> > > > > updated webrev at
> > > > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~tschatzl/8077144/webrev.3/ (full)
> > > > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~tschatzl/8077144/webrev.2_to_3/ (
> > > > > diff
> > > > > )
> > > > > 
> > > > > which implements the suggested changes.
> > > > 
> > > > src/share/vm/utilities/bitMap.hpp
> > > > 147   static idx_t size_in_words(size_t size_in_bits) {
> > > > 
> > > > I find the name of this function confusing in conjunction with
> > > > the
> > > > no-arg ordinary member function; I'm not keen on overloads with
> > > > with
> > > > very different semantics and usage. Clearer (to me) here might
> > > > be
> > > > something like calc_size_in_words.
> > > 
> > > The existing BitMap::word_align_up could be used instead of
> > > introducing this new function.
> > 
> >  I am not sure if that function helps in an as concise way as
> > calc_size_in_words().
> > 
> > I.e. do you suggest to use word_align_up(size())? Then I could as
> > well
> > use size_in_bytes() and divide by sizeof(bm_word_t). (by other
> > alignment/size constraints a per-region part must always be word
> > -aligned).
> > 
> > There has been a particular (non-public) request to be specific
> > with
> > sizes in these changes.
> > 
> > Or do you mean, use word_align_up() in calc_size_in_words()?
> 
> When I mentioned word_align_up, I was thinking there was a bits per 
> bm_word_t constant somewhere that could be used to get the word size 
> after aligning up.
> But there doesn’t seem to be any such thing, so ignore that part of
> the suggestion.
> 
> So I would like a different name, rather than overloading 
> size_in_words.
> calc_size_in_words would be fine, or something else if you have a
> better suggestion.
> 
> Other than this, with the deferral of other issues to JDK-8151386,
> looks good.
> I don’t need a new webrev for a name change here.

  Thanks for your review.

Thomas