RFR: 8202083: Remove explicit CMS checks in CardTableBarrierSet

[Erik Österlund]

Hi Kim,

Now that we reached an agreement on 8202082, may I assume we have 
reached an agreement here too?

Thanks,
/Erik

On 2018-04-23 23:29, Kim Barrett wrote:
>> On Apr 20, 2018, at 10:50 AM, Erik Österlund <erik.osterlund at oracle.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> In CardTableBarrierSet, we sometimes need fencing due to the card table being scanned concurrently when using CMS with pre-cleaning. Rather than explicitly checking for those CMS flags in the generic CardTableBarrierSet class, it is preferrable to check the CardTable scanned_concurrently() property which reflects that better
>>
>> Webrev:
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~eosterlund/8202083/webrev.00/
>>
>> Bug:
>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8202083
>>
>> Thanks,
>> /Erik
> Isn't the correct predicate here
> CardTableBarrierSet::card_mark_must_follow_store?
>
> Also, the comment probably ought to be "generalized".
>
> Also, CardTable::scanned_concurrently() seems misplaced. CardTable is
> a data structure, scanned_concurrently is a usage policy. And the only
> use of scanned_concurrently seems to be the implementation of
> card_mark_must_follow_store. It seems like CardTableBarrierSet would
> be a better place for that bit of information.
>