RFR: 8183542: Factor out serial GC specific code from GenCollectedHeap into its own subclass

[Kim Barrett]

> On Oct 19, 2017, at 12:39 PM, Roman Kennke <rkennke at redhat.com> wrote:
> 
> Am 18.10.2017 um 22:41 schrieb Kim Barrett:
>>> On Oct 18, 2017, at 4:04 PM, Roman Kennke <rkennke at redhat.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Am 18.10.2017 um 20:41 schrieb Kim Barrett:
>>>>> On Oct 18, 2017, at 8:08 AM, Roman Kennke <rkennke at redhat.com> wrote:
>>>>> Differential webrev:
>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rkennke/8183542/webrev.01.diff/ <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Erkennke/8183542/webrev.01.diff/>
>>>>> 
>>>>> Full webrev:
>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rkennke/8183542/webrev.01/ <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Erkennke/8183542/webrev.01/>
>>>>> 
>>>>> Better now?
>>>>> 
>>>>> Thanks, Roman
>>>> Looks good.
>>>> 
>>> Hi Kim,
>>> 
>>> thanks for the review.
>>> 
>>> I just fixed a bug caused by my similar CMSHeap extraction, and I think I need to do the same thing for SerialHeap too:
>>> 
>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8189373
>>> 
>>> This is the fix for the CMSHeap issue:
>>> 
>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rkennke/8189373/webrev.00/ <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Erkennke/8189373/webrev.00/>
>>> 
>>> I'll do the same for SerialHeap once the above has been approved and pushed, otherwise it'll be a mess. ;-)
>>> 
>>> Roman
>> The SA strikes again!  Yes, it looks like the same thing should be done for SerialHeap.
>> I’m going to leave the review of 8189373 to others who have more clue about the SA.
>> 
> Okidoki, so here comes the SerialGC with SA boilerplate:
> 
> Differential:
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rkennke/8183542/webrev.02.diff/ <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Erkennke/8183542/webrev.02.diff/>
> 
> Full:
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rkennke/8183542/webrev.02/ <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Erkennke/8183542/webrev.02/>
> 
> This builds on top of the patch for https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8189373 which should land in the repo shortly, and implements the same thing for SerialHeap. It also passes the test that failed in the mentioned bug report (with -XX:+UseSerialGC).
> 
> Can I get reviews (for the changed/added stuff) again?
> 
> Thanks, Roman

Looks good to me, though I don’t know much about the SA.
It at least looks consistent with the changes for JDK-8189373.