RFR: 8267653: Remove Mutex::_safepoint_check_sometimes [v2]
Coleen Phillimore
coleen.phillimore at oracle.com
Wed May 26 03:05:52 UTC 2021
On 5/25/21 10:00 PM, David Holmes wrote:
> On 26/05/2021 11:53 am, Coleen Phillimore wrote:
>> On Wed, 26 May 2021 00:38:00 GMT, David Holmes <dholmes at openjdk.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>> Coleen Phillimore has updated the pull request incrementally with
>>>> one additional commit since the last revision:
>>>>
>>>> Add assert that the thread is terminated before taking Heap_lock
>>>
>>> src/hotspot/share/gc/shenandoah/shenandoahReferenceProcessor.cpp
>>> line 543:
>>>
>>>> 541: } else {
>>>> 542: // Heap_lock protects external pending list
>>>> 543: MonitorLocker ml(Heap_lock);
>>>
>>> For performance you could leave the _no_safepoint_check flag.
>>
>> I cannot leave it because there's an assert to verify that we don't
>> try to take this lock without a safepoint check, since it was
>> declared with safepoint_check_always.
>
> But that assert only applies to JavaThreads and this is being taken by
> a GC thread isn't it?
It's true that if this is a non-Java thread, it wouldn't fire the assert
that checks that the states are consistent. I had to go study the code
a bit to see that, which I wouldn't want to do over again. But it would
be very inconsistent in the code since all other Heap_lock acquisitions
are not made with _no_safepoint_check, we would have to look again to
see why this is special and other GC threads take Heap_lock without
no_safepoint_check.
And it wouldn't be a meaningful optimization.
thanks,
Coleen
>
>>> src/hotspot/share/runtime/thread.cpp line 3420:
>>>
>>>> 3418: // we'll never emerge out of the safepoint before the VM
>>>> exits.
>>>> 3419:
>>>> 3420: MutexLocker ml(Heap_lock);
>>>
>>> Can you add an assert before this that the thread is_terminated() as
>>> that is the key to the mutex acquisition not doing a safepoint check.
>>
>> Ok, I can add:
>> + assert(thread->is_terminated(), "must be terminated before
>> acquiring Heap_lock");
>> and rerun tests.
>
> Thanks,
> David
>
>> -------------
>>
>> PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/4184
>>
More information about the shenandoah-dev
mailing list