RFR (S): 8188919: Generalize GC thread suspend/resume at safepoints

[Erik Österlund]

Hi Roman,

Thank you for the review.

/Erik

On fre, 2017-10-13 at 18:04 +0200, Roman Kennke wrote:
> Hi Erik,
> 
> thank you. The change looks good to me.
> 
> Roman (not an official reviewer, etc ;-) ).
> 
> > 
> > Hi Roman,
> > 
> > I waited for your changes to be upstreamed and rebased on top of
> > that
> > as you suggested.
> > 
> > New webrev:
> > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~eosterlund/8188919/webrev.01/
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > /Erik
> > 
> > On mån, 2017-10-09 at 17:46 +0200, Roman Kennke wrote:
> > > 
> > > Am 09.10.2017 um 17:35 schrieb Erik Österlund:
> > > > 
> > > > Hi,
> > > > 
> > > > When we synchronize/unsynchronize safepoints, we make sure to
> > > > perform
> > > > corresponding suspend/resume calls to GC-specific concurrent
> > > > workers
> > > > that may interfere with the safepoint. This is currently done
> > > > by
> > > > dumping GC-specific callbacks right in
> > > > SafepointSynchronize::begin()
> > > > and SafepointSynchronize::end(). The purpose with this cleanup
> > > > is
> > > > to
> > > > hide this behind a general interface on CollectedHeap instead.
> > > > 
> > > > Webrev:
> > > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~eosterlund/8188919/webrev.00/
> > > > 
> > > > Bug:
> > > > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8188919
> > > > 
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > /Erik
> > > I like it.
> > > 
> > > It's going to conflict with this almost-pushed changeset though:
> > > 
> > > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8179387
> > > 
> > > In fact, I think it's be cleaner to base your patch on this one.
> > > 
> > > Roman
> > > 
> > >