RFR(M): 8220311: Implementation: NUMA-Aware Memory Allocation for G1, Survivor (2/3)

[sangheon.kim at oracle.com]

Hi Stefan,

On 10/23/19 1:47 AM, Stefan Johansson wrote:
> Hi Sangheon,
>
> On 2019-10-22 18:47, sangheon.kim at oracle.com wrote:
>> Hi Kim,
>>
>> On 10/22/19 12:19 AM, Kim Barrett wrote:
>>>> On Oct 22, 2019, at 1:52 AM, sangheon.kim at oracle.com wrote:
>>>> What do you think about below comment?
>>>>
>>>>    // Tries to allocate word_sz in the PLAB of the next 
>>>> "generation" after trying to
>>>>    // allocate into dest. Previous_plab_refill_failed indicates 
>>>> whether previous
>>>>    // PLAB refill for the original (source) object was failed.
>>> Drop “was”.  Otherwise looks good.
>> Done.
>>
>> Webrev:
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sangheki/8220311/webrev.3
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sangheki/8220311/webrev.3.inc
> Looks good in general, just one minor thing, no need for a new webrev 
> though:
> src/hotspot/share/gc/g1/g1Allocator.cpp
> ---
> 144   for (uint nodex_index = 0; nodex_index < _num_alloc_regions; 
> nodex_index++) {
>
> The name nodex_index has one too many x:es =) I would prefer node_index.
Ouch!
Fixed..

In addition, Stefan, Thomas and I had some discussion about making 
PLAB-NUMA aware (only for survivor).
Stefan provided a patch with it and it is simple enough to include under 
this CR.

Webrev:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sangheki/8220311/webrev.4
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sangheki/8220311/webrev.4.inc

Testing: hs-tier 1 ~ 3, with/without UseNUMA

Thanks,
Sangheon


> ---
>
> Thanks,
> Stefan
>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Sangheon
>>
>>
>>>
>>>>    // Returns a non-NULL pointer if successful, and updates dest if 
>>>> required.
>>>>    // Also determines whether we should continue to try to allocate 
>>>> into the various
>>>>    // generations or just end trying to allocate.
>>>>    HeapWord* allocate_in_next_plab(G1HeapRegionAttr* dest,
>>>> ...
>>>>
>>>> Let me post the webrev when we decide. :)
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Sangheon
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Looks good, other than that one comment issue.
>>>
>>