RFR(M) 8043575: Dynamically parallelize reference processing work

[sangheon.kim at oracle.com]

Hi Thomas,

> On Jun 14, 2018, at 8:34 PM, Thomas Schatzl <thomas.schatzl at oracle.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi all,
> 
>  after some talk about making parallel ref processing default for G1
> the suggestion came up to extract that part into a separate CR. I will
> post that one shortly.
> 
> However, this means that there is a trivial change in this webrev to be
> looked at:
> 
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~tschatzl/8043575/webrev.3_to_4 (diff)
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~tschatzl/8043575/webrev.4 (full)
Webrev.4 still looks good. 

Thanks,
Sangheon


> 
> This is the full change, for reference:
> 
> --- old/src/hotspot/share/gc/g1/g1Arguments.cpp    2018-06-14
> 13:30:08.166027425 +0200
> +++ new/src/hotspot/share/gc/g1/g1Arguments.cpp    2018-06-14
> 13:30:07.818016510 +0200
> @@ -122,10 +122,6 @@
>     FLAG_SET_DEFAULT(GCPauseIntervalMillis, MaxGCPauseMillis + 1);
>   }
> 
> -  if (FLAG_IS_DEFAULT(ParallelRefProcEnabled) && ParallelGCThreads >
> 1) {
> -    FLAG_SET_DEFAULT(ParallelRefProcEnabled, true);
> -  }
> -
>   log_trace(gc)("MarkStackSize: %uk  MarkStackSizeMax: %uk", (unsigned
> int) (MarkStackSize / K), (uint) (MarkStackSizeMax / K));
> 
>   // By default do not let the target stack size to be more than 1/4
> of the entries
> 
> Thanks,
>  Thomas
> 
>> On Thu, 2018-06-14 at 09:41 +0200, Thomas Schatzl wrote:
>> Hi Kim and Sangheon,
>> 
>> On Wed, 2018-06-13 at 18:05 -0400, Kim Barrett wrote:
>>>> On Jun 8, 2018, at 10:52 AM, Thomas Schatzl <thomas.schatzl at oracl
>>>> e.
>>>> com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Webrev is at http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~tschatzl/8043575/webrev.
>>>> 3/
>>>> .
>>>> 
>>>> This webrev is based on top of latest jdk/jdk and
>>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8202845 .
>>>> 
>>>> If you want to test parallel gc, you also need the fixes for JDK-
>>>> 8204617 and JDK-8204618 currently out for review.
>>>> 
>>>> Testing:
>>>> hs-tier1-4,jdk-tier1-3 with +/-ParallelRefProcEnabled
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Thomas
>>> 
>>> Looks good.
>>> 
>> 
>>  thanks for your reviews.
>> 
>> Thomas
>> 
>