[8u] [JFR] RFR: JFR backports from 11.0.4

Mon Sep 9 09:37:50 UTC 2019

Hi Denghui,

Yes, the list looks good to me. As you mentioned, we should try first
the 11u backports and then backport to 8u.

The process for the backport is highlighted here:
https://wiki.openjdk.java.net/display/JDKUpdates/How+to+contribute+a+fix

Cheers,
Mario

On Mon, Sep 9, 2019 at 4:07 AM DDH <denghui.ddh at alibaba-inc.com> wrote:
>
> hi all,
>   We(Alibaba) picked some jfr backports as follows from JBS
> (https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8230624?jql=Subcomponent%20%3D%20jfr%20and%20resolution%20%3D%20Fixed%20and%20fixVersion%20%3E%2011.0.6%20and%20type%20!%3D%20Backport), we
> think it is worth porting them to 8u/11u.
>   We plan to backport them to 11u at first, and then to 8u, what's your comment?
>   If you think it is reasonable, we can provide our webrev of some issues as soon as possible, and continue work on other issues.
>
> 8223396: [TESTBUG] several jfr tests do not clean up files created in /tmp
> 8225004: Remove invalid assertion in jfr_conditional_flush()
> 8214542: [BUG] JFR: Old Object Sample event slow on a deep heap in debug builds (Unresolved)
> 8228834: [BUG] Regression caused by JDK-8214542 not installing complete checkpoint data to candidates
> 8228359: [TESTBUG] jdk.jfr.e.g.c.TestGCHeapConfigurationEventWith32BitOops.java does not expect MinHeapSize to be aligned to HeapAlignment
> 8227605: [BUG] Kitchensink fails "assert((((klass)->trace_id() & (JfrTraceIdEpoch::leakp_in_use_this_epoch_bit())) != 0)) failed: invariant"
> 8227411: [BUG] TestTimeMultiple.java failed "assert(!lease()) failed: invariant"
> 8224172: [BUG] assert(jfr_is_event_enabled(id)) failed: invariant
> 8212663: [BUG] Remove conservative at_safepoint assert when JFR writes type sets during class unloading
> 8216064: [BUG] -XX:StartFlightRecording:settings= doesn't work properly
> 8214750: [BUG] Unnecessary <p> tags in jfr classes
> 8213570: [TESTBUG] Update JFR sanity test set
> 8226779: [TESTBUG] Test JFR API from Java agent
> 8229189: [Enhancement] Improve JFR leak profiler tracing to deal with discontiguous heaps
> 8223438: [Enhancement] add VirtualizationInformation JFR event
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> From:Andrey Petushkov <andrey at azul.com>
> Send Time:2019年9月5日(星期四) 23:55
> To:Mario Torre <neugens at redhat.com>
> Cc:jdk8u-dev at openjdk.java.net <jdk8u-dev at openjdk.java.net>
> Subject:Re: [8u] [JFR] RFR: JFR backports from 11.0.4
>
> Hi Mario,
>
> The following fixes apply trivially to jdk11u, so I've requested the permission to backport per process.
>
> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8220555
> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8221711
> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8222888
> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8221569
> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8216283
>
> The rest require some rework, I'll post RFRs soon
>
> Thanks,
> Andrey
>
> > On 4 Sep 2019, at 17:47, Mario Torre <neugens at redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > Awesome, thanks for checking zero.
> >
> > As discussed offline, we have a few backports that were directly
> > backported to 8u without first being in 11u:
> >
> > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8185525
> > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8223599
> > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8225310
> > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8221711
> > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8222888
> > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8216283
> > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8220555
> > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8217362
> > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8221569
> > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8224217
> >
> > A couple of those are wither being worked on or of interest for 11u,
> > so they should be fine, some aren't and while may not be critical I
> > think they are nice to have (like the container tests), so I would
> > expect all of them to be backported to 11u.
> >
> > Since this is a staging repository we may go ahead and push them and
> > work on the backport to 11 afterward, but I would prefer to not create
> > a discrepancy at this moment, so if possible we should work on the
> > backports to 11 first.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Mario
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Sep 4, 2019 at 4:09 PM Andrey Petushkov <andrey at azul.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Mario,
> >>
> >> zero build is fine (e.g. mentioned method has default no-op implementation in vm_version.hpp)
> >>
> >> Andrey
> >>
> >>> On 4 Sep 2019, at 12:52, Mario Torre <neugens at redhat.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On 03/09/2019 13:53, Andrey Petushkov wrote:
> >>>> Dear All,
> >>>>
> >>>> could you please consider the following set of backports of the JFR fixes from 11.0.4 release into 8u incubator baseline:
> >>>
> >>> This seems good, the only nit I have now is that some of those changes
> >>> may break zero again, I think it may make sense to fix it in this patch
> >>> set instead of filing a dedicated bug report later.
> >>>
> >>> See for example:
> >>>
> >>> JDK-8219241
> >>>
> >>> +void VM_Version::print_platform_virtualization_info(outputStream* st) {
> >>>
> >>> etc..
> >>>
> >>> Cheers,
> >>> Mario
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Mario Torre
> >>> Associate Manager, Software Engineering
> >>> Red Hat GmbH <https://www.redhat.com>
> >>> 9704 A60C B4BE A8B8 0F30  9205 5D7E 4952 3F65 7898
> >>
> >
> >
> > --
> > Mario Torre
> > Associate Manager, Software Engineering
> > Red Hat GmbH <https://www.redhat.com>
> > 9704 A60C B4BE A8B8 0F30  9205 5D7E 4952 3F65 7898

-- 
Mario Torre
Associate Manager, Software Engineering
Red Hat GmbH <https://www.redhat.com>
9704 A60C B4BE A8B8 0F30  9205 5D7E 4952 3F65 7898