RFR (M): 8210462: Fix remaining mentions of initial mark

[Kim Barrett]

> On Jul 3, 2020, at 2:06 PM, Thomas Schatzl <thomas.schatzl at oracle.com> wrote:
> 
> Webrevs:
> 
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~tschatzl/8210462/webrev.0_to_1/ (diff)
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~tschatzl/8210462/webrev.1/ (full)
> 
> Thanks,
>  Thomas

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
src/hotspot/share/gc/g1/g1CollectedHeap.hpp
 537   // otherwise reachable ensure that it is marked in the bitmap for concurrent marking

[pre-existing]
There should be a sentence break or a semi-colon or something between
"reachable" and "ensure"

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
src/hotspot/share/gc/g1/g1CollectorState.hpp
  53   volatile bool _in_concurrent_mark_gc;

Shouldn't this be _in_concurrent_start_gc?

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
src/hotspot/share/gc/g1/g1OopClosures.inline.hpp
 254     // closure during a concurrent mark pause then attempt to mark the object.
 
s/concurrent mark/concurrent start/ ?

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
src/hotspot/share/gc/g1/g1Policy.cpp 
 682   } else if (!is_young_only_pause(this_pause)) {
 683     // This is a mixed GC. Here we decide whether to continue doing more

Maybe there should be an assertion that this really is a mixed pause?

Or maybe this should be testing for a mixed pause, and the else clause
should assert is_young_only_pause.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
src/hotspot/share/gc/g1/g1Policy.cpp
[removed]
 636   bool this_pause_was_young_only = collector_state()->in_young_only_phase();

Why was this variable removed and uses replaced with
is_young_only_only(this_pause), rather than keeping the variable but
updating the initialization?

------------------------------------------------------------------------------