Fwd: RFR: 8158946 - btree009 fails with assert(s > 0) failed: Bad size calculated

[Coleen Phillimore]

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~drwhite/8158946/webrev.04/src/share/vm/classfile/javaClasses.hpp.udiff.html
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~drwhite/8158946/webrev.04/src/share/vm/gc/cms/concurrentMarkSweepGeneration.cpp.udiff.html

Since there are no changes, can you hg revert thes file?

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~drwhite/8158946/webrev.04/src/share/vm/oops/instanceMirrorKlass.cpp.udiff.html

Wow, what a small race!

Nice fix.  The code looks good.

Coleen


On 6/30/16 5:15 PM, Derek White wrote:
> New webrev goes back to using java_lang_Class::set_oop_size(new_cls, 
> size);
>
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~drwhite/8158946/webrev.04/
>
> jprt run in progress. Built w/ and w/o PCH.
>
> On 6/30/16 7:56 AM, Derek White wrote:
>> On 6/30/16 12:28 AM, David Holmes wrote:
>>> Hi Derek,
>>>
>>> Understand the fix in principle.
>>>
>>> But I don't understand why you got rid of 
>>> java_lang_Class::set_oop_size, and instead exposed 
>>> java_lang_Class::oop_size_offset(), then had 
>>> InstanceMirrorKlass::allocate_instance pass the offset to 
>>> CollectedHeap::class_allocate, which passes it to 
>>> CollectedHeap::post_allocation_setup_class - that seems rather 
>>> convoluted. Can CollectedHeap::post_allocation_setup_class not call 
>>> java_lang_Class::set_oop_size directly?
>>
>> Short answer is I didn't think so. collectedHeap.inline.hpp has a 
>> very small include set, and I was concerned about circular 
>> dependencies. Another approach would be to push ::set_oop_size() over 
>> to instanceKlassMirror.hpp, and see if the includes seem saner that 
>> way. I'll try some alternatives...
>
> OK, doing the simple and obvious thing worked out after all. Thanks 
> David!
>
>  - Derek