<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
Hi John,<br>
<br>
On 12/21/12 7:46 PM, John Cuthbertson wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:50D4AE8B.1030607@oracle.com" type="cite">
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
Hi Bengt,<br>
<br>
Great. The old names have been removed (they won't be accepted in
either hs24 or hs25). This makes the changes a lot smaller. Your
statement below was part of teh reason why I wanted them to stay
experimental.<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
Great! Ship it!<br>
<br>
Bengt<br>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:50D4AE8B.1030607@oracle.com" type="cite"> <br>
JohnC<br>
<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 12/21/2012 5:47 AM, Bengt Rutisson
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:50D46874.9060304@oracle.com" type="cite">
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
Hi John,<br>
<br>
On 12/20/12 7:04 PM, John Cuthbertson wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:50D35327.7080502@oracle.com" type="cite">
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
Hi Ramki, Bengt,<br>
<br>
Thanks for the reviews. I kept the old names because the perf
team would like these backported to hs24 (7u12) and the old
names have been published in several presentation decks -
including one from Monica and Charlie at JavaOne. Does it
still make sense to just accept the new names? The change
would be much smaller if so.<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
Personally I would still not think we should keep the old names.
After all they are experimental flags.<br>
<br>
If we should keep the old names I think it would be enough to
that in hs24/7u12. I would prefer that we don't have the old
names in JDK8.<br>
<br>
Thanks,<br>
Bengt<br>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:50D35327.7080502@oracle.com" type="cite">
<br>
Thanks,<br>
<br>
JohnC<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 12/20/2012 1:19 AM, Srinivas
Ramakrishna wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CABzyjyk=WNhawzQuc4k+0hrrCihhXYr7aig4WzqLzfueSseuUw@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">New names look good. I agree with Bengt that for
renames of exptal flags in a major release bothering
supporting old names is not worthwhile; best to<br>
make a clean break with the old names.<br>
<br>
reviewed<br>
-- ramki<br>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 10:30 PM,
Bengt Rutisson <span dir="ltr"><<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:bengt.rutisson@oracle.com"
target="_blank">bengt.rutisson@oracle.com</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div><br>
Hi again John,<br>
<br>
I realized that I was a bit too fast with my comment
about using ObsoleteFlag. Your code is aliasing the
old names for the new ones which is something the
obsolete flag management does not do.<br>
<br>
But on the other hand, do we really want to do this?
These are all experimental flags and we are pushing
this change to a major release, JDK8. Personally I
don't think it is worth supporting the old names.<span
class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><br>
<br>
Bengt</font></span>
<div>
<div class="h5"><br>
<br>
On 12/20/12 5:45 AM, Bengt Rutisson wrote:<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div class="h5">
<blockquote type="cite">
<div><br>
Hi John,<br>
<br>
This looks good. But I think that instead of
your change in arguments.cpp you could make
use of the obsolete_jvm_flags list that exist
in the same file. I think that is intended for
exactly this purpose. Accepting a removed flag
name for a little while. The nice thing about
it it that you specify how long you will
accept the old name.<br>
<br>
static ObsoleteFlag obsolete_jvm_flags[] = {<br>
{ "UseTrainGC",
JDK_Version::jdk(5), JDK_Version::jdk(7) },<br>
<br>
If you use this you also have to remove the
old flag names from globals.hpp.<br>
<br>
Bengt<br>
<br>
<br>
On 12/20/12 1:56 AM, John Cuthbertson wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">Hi Everyone, <br>
<br>
Some flag name changes suggested by the JVM
performance team based upon feedback they have
received. The webrev can found at: <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Ejohnc/8001424/webrev.0/"
target="_blank">http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~johnc/8001424/webrev.0/</a>
<br>
<br>
Basically the changes are those listed in the
webrev: <br>
<br>
G1DefaultMinNewGenPercent is being replaced by
G1NewSizePercent <br>
G1DefaultMaxNewGenPercent is being replaced by
G1MaxNewSizePercent <br>
G1OldCSetRegionLiveThresholdPercent is being
replaced by G1MixedGCLiveThresholdPercent <br>
<br>
Thanks, <br>
<br>
JohnC <br>
</blockquote>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>