[CAUTION] RE: RFR(xxs): 8241395: Factor out platform independent code for os::xxx_memory_special()

[Schmidt, Lutz]

Hi Thomas, 

looks good to me in general.

Is there a reason why in os_aix.cpp there is an assert(false) in pd_reserve* and an unimplemented() in pd_release*? For the other OSes, there is a fatal(), if applicable.

In addition, I'd like to see the same failure text in either case.

No new webrev required. 

Thanks,
Lutz

On 24.03.20, 16:31, "hotspot-runtime-dev on behalf of Doerr, Martin" <hotspot-runtime-dev-bounces at openjdk.java.net on behalf of martin.doerr at sap.com> wrote:

    Hi Thomas,
    
    looks good to me, too.
    
    In addition to the copyright, please improve indentation for the 2nd argument line in os_linux.cpp and os_windows.cpp:
    +char* os::pd_reserve_memory_special(size_t bytes, size_t alignment,
                                      char* req_addr, bool exec) {
    
    and remove extra newline in os.cpp:
    +   return result;
    + 
    + }
    
    No need for a new webrev.
    
    Best regards,
    Martin
    
    
    > -----Original Message-----
    > From: hotspot-runtime-dev <hotspot-runtime-dev-
    > bounces at openjdk.java.net> On Behalf Of Baesken, Matthias
    > Sent: Dienstag, 24. März 2020 16:25
    > To: Thomas Stüfe <thomas.stuefe at gmail.com>; hotspot-runtime-
    > dev at openjdk.java.net
    > Subject: RE: RFR(xxs): 8241395: Factor out platform independent
    > code for os::xxx_memory_special()
    > 
    > Hi Thomas, looks good to me.
    > But you might want to change the copyright year in
    > 
    > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~stuefe/webrevs/8241395-refactor-reserve-
    > memory-
    > special/webrev.00/webrev/src/hotspot/share/runtime/os.hpp.frames.html
    > 
    > Thanks, Matthias
    > 
    > ---------- Forwarded message ---------
    > From: Thomas Stüfe
    > <thomas.stuefe at gmail.com<mailto:thomas.stuefe at gmail.com>>
    > Date: Sat, Mar 21, 2020 at 1:40 PM
    > Subject: RFR(xxs): 8241395: Factor out platform independent code for
    > os::xxx_memory_special()
    > To: Hotspot dev runtime <hotspot-runtime-
    > dev at openjdk.java.net<mailto:hotspot-runtime-dev at openjdk.java.net>>
    > 
    > Hi,
    > 
    > may I please have reviews for this little cleanup.
    > 
    > A while ago we factored out platform independent behavior for
    > os::reserve_memory() and friends to os.cpp and relegated platform
    > dependent code to os::pd_reserve_memory() etc. This change does the
    > same for os::reserve_memory_special() and os::release_memory_special().
    > 
    > Only Linux and Windows are affected since only they have meaningful
    > implementations for UseLargePages.
    > 
    > It also adds a small comment about the NMT Tracker object.
    > 
    > In addition it asserts - now for all platforms, it used to do this only on Linux -
    > that if both requested address and alignment are given to
    > os::reserve_memory_special() the requested address should at least be
    > aligned to the given alignment (the arguments should be mutually exclusive
    > and I plan to clean this up further).
    > 
    > Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8241395
    > webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~stuefe/webrevs/8241395-refactor-
    > reserve-memory-special/webrev.00/webrev/
    > 
    > Thanks, Thomas