RFR (M): 8231209: [REDO] ThreadMXBean::getThreadAllocatedBytes() can be quicker for self thread

Mandy Chung mandy.chung at oracle.com
Tue Sep 24 16:38:21 UTC 2019


On 9/24/19 8:45 AM, Hohensee, Paul wrote:
> Good idea. The current definition is
>
> enum {
>    JMM_VERSION_1   = 0x20010000,
>    JMM_VERSION_1_0 = 0x20010000,
>    JMM_VERSION_1_1 = 0x20010100, // JDK 6
>    JMM_VERSION_1_2 = 0x20010200, // JDK 7
>    JMM_VERSION_1_2_1 = 0x20010201, // JDK 7 GA
>    JMM_VERSION_1_2_2 = 0x20010202,
>    JMM_VERSION_2  = 0x20020000,  // JDK 10
>    JMM_VERSION     = 0x20020000
> };
>
> Were there changes in 11, 12, and 13 to justify adding major/minor versions for any of them? What was changed in 10 to justify a new major version?

A new API ThreadMXBean.dumpAllThreads taking a maxDepth argument [1] was 
added in 10.  It changed an existing function signature.   I don't think 
any change was made to jmm.h since 10.


The JMM version was originally designed to follow the same convention as 
the old JDK versioning where major version revision indicates a major 
release with potential incompatible change whereas minor version 
revision indicates that no incompatible change to existing APIs.  This 
explains why major version was bumped in 10.

> Absent any other additions, would this work? It creates a minor version for 14.
>
> JMM_VERSION_2_1 = 0x20020100, // JDK 14
> JMM_VERSION = JMM_VERSION_2_1

Perhaps it's time to simplify the scheme to bump the major number when 
there is change in a JDK release.

JMM_VERSION_14 = 0x20040000,

Mandy

> Thanks,
>
> Paul
>
> On 9/23/19, 8:42 PM, "Mandy Chung" <mandy.chung at oracle.com> wrote:
>
>      Good question.
>      
>      When HS express (mix-n-matched JDK and HS version) was supported, the
>      JMM_VERSION was rev'ed to enable the version checking.  HS express is no
>      longer supported.  JDK is supported to run with this version of HotSpot
>      VM.  OTOH, this adds a new function in the middle of the function
>      table.  I think it's a good convention to follow and bump the version
>      number.
>      
>      Mandy
>      
>      On 9/23/19 7:54 PM, Daniil Titov wrote:
>      > Hi Paul,
>      >
>      > I have a question about JMM_VERSION. Since the changeset introduces a new method in the interface
>      > should not JMM_VERSION  declared in src/hotspot/share/include/jmm.h  be bumped?
>      >
>      > Thank you,
>      > --Daniil
>      >
>      > On 9/23/19, 5:43 PM, "serviceability-dev on behalf of Hohensee, Paul" <serviceability-dev-bounces at openjdk.java.net on behalf of hohensee at amazon.com> wrote:
>      >
>      >      Update:
>      >
>      >      Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8231209
>      >      CSR: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8231374
>      >      Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~phh/8231209/webrev.01/
>      >
>      >      All test suites that reference getThreadAllocatedBytes pass. These are
>      >
>      >      hotspot/jtreg/vmTestbase/nsk/monitoring (contained the failing test)
>      >      jdk/com/sun/management
>      >      jdk/jdk/jfr/event/runtime
>      >
>      >      Per Mandy, the default getCurrentThreadAllocatedBytes implementation throws a UOE.
>      >
>      >      The CSR is a copy of the original, and in addition points out that ThreadMXBean is a PlatformManagedObject, why that's important, and why a default getCurrentThreadAllocatedBytes implementation is necessary.
>      >
>      >      I changed the nsk test to make sure that the approach it uses will work with getCurrentThreadAllocatedBytes, which per Mandy is defined as a property. Though I'm happy to remove it if there's a consensus it isn't needed.
>      >
>      >      Thanks,
>      >
>      >      Paul
>      >
>      >      On 9/19/19, 11:03 PM, "serguei.spitsyn at oracle.com" <serguei.spitsyn at oracle.com> wrote:
>      >
>      >          Hi Paul,
>      >
>      >          I have almost the same comments as David:
>      >            - the same two spots of changes identified
>      >            - the addition of the default method was expected
>      >            - the change in test is a surprise (I also doubt, it is really needed)
>      >            - new CSR is needed
>      >
>      >
>      >          Sorry, I forgot to remind about running the vmTestbase monitoring tests. :(
>      >
>      >          Thanks,
>      >          Serguei
>      >
>      >
>      >          On 9/19/19 16:06, David Holmes wrote:
>      >          > Hi Paul,
>      >          >
>      >          > On 20/09/2019 2:52 am, Hohensee, Paul wrote:
>      >          >> More formally,
>      >          >>
>      >          >> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8231209
>      >          >> Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~phh/8231209/webrev.00/
>      >          >
>      >          > I'm assuming there are only two changes here:
>      >          >
>      >          > 1. The new method is now a default method that throws UOE.
>      >          >
>      >          > That seems fine.
>      >          >
>      >          > 2. You implemented the new method in the test class.
>      >          >
>      >          > I don't understand why you did that. The test can't be calling the new
>      >          > method. Now that it is a default method we will get past the
>      >          > compilation failure that caused the problem. So no change to the test
>      >          > should be needed AFAICS.
>      >          >
>      >          > A new CSR request is needed. Just copy everything across from the old,
>      >          > with the updated spec. But please also mention this is a
>      >          > PlatformManagedObject in the compatibility discussion.
>      >          >
>      >          > Thanks,
>      >          > David
>      >          >
>      >          >> Thanks,
>      >          >>
>      >          >> On 9/19/19, 9:44 AM, "serviceability-dev on behalf of Hohensee,
>      >          >> Paul" <serviceability-dev-bounces at openjdk.java.net on behalf of
>      >          >> hohensee at amazon.com> wrote:
>      >          >>
>      >          >>      Off by 2 error. Changed the subject to reflect 8231209.
>      >          >>           http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~phh/8231209/webrev.00/
>      >          >>           Paul
>      >          >>           On 9/19/19, 6:31 AM, "Daniel D. Daugherty"
>      >          >> <daniel.daugherty at oracle.com> wrote:
>      >          >>                > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~phh/8231211/webrev.00/
>      >          >>                   The redo bug is 8231209. 8231211 is closed as a dup
>      >          >> of 8231210.
>      >          >>                   Dan
>      >          >>                            On 9/19/19 9:17 AM, Hohensee, Paul wrote:
>      >          >>          > I'll have the default method throw UOE. That's the same as
>      >          >> the other default methods do.
>      >          >>          >
>      >          >>          > The necessary test fix is in
>      >          >> test/hotspot/jtreg/vmTestbase/nsk/monitoring/share/server/ServerThreadMXBeanNew.java,
>      >          >> which needs a new getCurrentThreadAllocatedBytes method, defined as
>      >          >>          >
>      >          >>          >      public long getCurrentThreadAllocatedBytes() {
>      >          >>          >          return (Long)
>      >          >> invokeMethod("getCurrentThreadAllocatedBytes",
>      >          >>          >              new Object[] { },
>      >          >>          >              new String[] { });
>      >          >>          >      }
>      >          >>          >
>      >          >>          > With this fix, the 134 tests in
>      >          >> test/hotspot/jtreg/vmTestbase/nsk/monitoring/ThreadMXBean pass.
>      >          >> Preliminary webrev at
>      >          >>          >
>      >          >>          > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~phh/8231211/webrev.00/
>      >          >>          >
>      >          >>          > Is it worth adding getCurrentThreadAllocatedBytes tests to
>      >          >> the
>      >          >> test/hotspot/jtreg/vmTestbase/nsk/monitoring/ThreadMXBean/GetThreadAllocatedBytes
>      >          >> set?
>      >          >>          >
>      >          >>          > Paul
>      >          >>          >
>      >          >>          > On 9/18/19, 8:16 PM, "David Holmes"
>      >          >> <david.holmes at oracle.com> wrote:
>      >          >>          >
>      >          >>          >      On 19/09/2019 12:57 pm, Mandy Chung wrote:
>      >          >>          >      > On 9/18/19 5:00 PM, Hohensee, Paul wrote:
>      >          >>          >      >> They all implement
>      >          >> com.sun.management.ThreadMXBean, so adding a
>      >          >>          >      >> getCurrentThreadAllocatedBytes broke them.
>      >          >> Potential fix is to give it
>      >          >>          >      >> a default implementation, vis
>      >          >>          >      >>
>      >          >>          >      >>      public default long
>      >          >> getCurrentThreadAllocatedBytes() {
>      >          >>          >      >>          return -1;
>      >          >>          >      >>      }
>      >          >>          >      >>
>      >          >>          >      >
>      >          >>          >      > com.sun.management.ThreadMXBean (and other platform
>      >          >> MXBeans) is a
>      >          >>          >      > "sealed" interface which should only be implemented
>      >          >> by JDK.
>      >          >>          >
>      >          >>          >      Didn't realize that. I don't recall knowing about
>      >          >> PlatformManagedObject.
>      >          >>          >      Sealed types will at least allow this to be enforced,
>      >          >> though I have to
>      >          >>          >      wonder what the tests are doing here.
>      >          >>          >
>      >          >>          >      > Unfortunately we don't have the sealed type feature
>      >          >> yet.  Yes it needs
>      >          >>          >      > to be a default method.  I think it should throw UOE.
>      >          >>          >      >
>      >          >>          >      >       * @implSpec
>      >          >>          >      >       * The default implementation throws {@code
>      >          >>          >      > UnsupportedOperationException}.
>      >          >>          >      >
>      >          >>          >      > The @throw UOE can make it clear that it does not
>      >          >> support current thread
>      >          >>          >      > memory allocation measurement.
>      >          >>          >
>      >          >>          >      Yes that seems a reasonable default if we don't want
>      >          >> this to be
>      >          >>          >      implemented outside the platform.
>      >          >>          >
>      >          >>          >      Thanks,
>      >          >>          >      David
>      >          >>          >
>      >          >>          >      > Mandy
>      >          >>          >
>      >          >>          >
>      >          >>
>      >
>      >
>      >
>      >
>      >
>      >
>      >
>      
>      
>



More information about the serviceability-dev mailing list