Pls review 7091418: FX priority class from Solaris should be available to JVM )

[David Holmes]

Thanks Paul. Thumbs up from me.

David

On 26/01/2012 9:08 AM, Paul Hohensee wrote:
> New webrev at
>
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~phh/7091418.01/
>
> It incorporates your suggestion.
>
> I need another review, pls. Any takers?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Paul
>
> On 1/25/12 2:30 AM, David Holmes wrote:
>> On 25/01/2012 5:55 AM, Paul Hohensee wrote:
>>> Thanks for the review.
>>
>> You're most welcome :)
>>
>>> Inline...
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>>> The second part is the "map Thread.MAX_PRIORITY to the critical
>>>> priority" part. On Solaris you use UseCriticalJavaThreadPriority to
>>>> actually update the priority mapping 10 -> critical. But you don't do
>>>> this on the other platforms. This is what I object to - if you are
>>>> going to make this a cross-platform setting then it should be
>>>> implemented fully on all platforms. It doesn't matter that by default
>>>> the end result is the same, the code should be there so that if you
>>>> could define the critical priority at runtime things would work as
>>>> expected.
>>>
>>> I didn't do it on non-Solaris platforms (at least not in the code)
>>> because on those platforms CriticalPriority is the same as
>>> MaxPriority. No runtime mapping needed. For compiler threads and the
>>> CMS background thread on non-Solaris platforms, using critical
>>> priority will up their priority, which is new.
>>
>> All I'm looking for on linux for example is that in prio_init() you add:
>>
>> if (UseCriticalJavaThreadPriority) {
>> os::java_to_os_priority[MaxPriority] =
>> os::java_to_os_priority[CriticalPriority] ;
>> }
>>
>> That way if someone decides they want to try changing the priority
>> table from
>>
>> -5 // 11 CriticalPriority
>>
>> to
>>
>> -25 // 11 CriticalPriority
>>
>> then UseCriticalJavaThreadPriority will "just work".
>>
>> Thanks,
>> David
>> -----
>>