Request for review: 8010518 Move deprecating CMSIncrementalMode from Arguments::check_deprecated_gcs() to Arguments::check_deprecated_gc_flags()

[Bengt Rutisson]

Hi Tao,

On 4/19/13 1:45 AM, Tao Mao wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> After reading JEP documentation, I don't feel like moving 
> CMSIncrementalMode to check_deprecated_gc_flags() because it's 
> essentially Incremental CMS collector. It's more expected to live in 
> check_deprecated_gcs() (at least to me). What are your opinions? If no 
> one opposes, I will close this CR.

I'm fine with this.

Bengt

>
> Thanks.
> Tao
>
> On 3/28/13 11:09 AM, Bengt Rutisson wrote:
>> On 3/28/13 6:50 PM, Tao Mao wrote:
>>> Hi Bengt,
>>>
>>> On 3/27/2013 11:31 PM, Bengt Rutisson wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi Tao,
>>>>
>>>> On 3/27/13 11:45 PM, Tao Mao wrote:
>>>>> Please see inline.
>>>>> Tao
>>>>>
>>>>> On 3/25/13 9:56 PM, Bengt Rutisson wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Tao,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks for updating the tests. Looks good to me.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Have you tried running the tests? It is a very small change so it 
>>>>>> should be ok. But our testing process is very strange and it may 
>>>>>> be that these tests are not run until PIT testing, so running 
>>>>>> them once before pushing is a good idea to avoid unnecessary 
>>>>>> issues later on.
>>>>> They have passed the jtreg tests. I'm going to push it.
>>>>>
>>>>> script:
>>>>> jtreg -jdk:/Users/tamao/home/jdk1.8.0_b74_macosx/ \
>>>>> -vmoption:-tamao \
>>>>> ./src/8010518MoveDeprecatingCMSIncrementalMode/test/gc/startup_warnings/TestCMSIncrementalMode.java 
>>>>> \
>>>>> ./src/8010518MoveDeprecatingCMSIncrementalMode/test/gc/startup_warnings/TestIncGC.java
>>>>>
>>>>> results:
>>>>> Test results: passed: 2
>>>>> Report written to 
>>>>> /Users/tamao/Dropbox/Oracle/JTreport/html/report.html
>>>>> Results written to /Users/tamao/Dropbox/Oracle/JTwork
>>>>
>>>> Great! Thanks!
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Also, I see that you decided not to remove "likely" from the 
>>>>>> other messages in Arguments::check_deprecated_gcs(). Would you 
>>>>>> like to do that as a separate change or do you think we should 
>>>>>> leave those messages unchanged?
>>>>> So what was the decision for deprecating these gc's? To me, there 
>>>>> hasn't seemed to be any definitive decision, yet.
>>>>
>>>> It is the same decision as for CMSIncrementalMode, where you 
>>>> removed the "likely".
>>>>
>>>> Bengt
>>> Where is the latest update regarding this issue? Any mail thread, or 
>>> web?
>>
>> I think the JEP is pretty clear about it:
>>
>> http://openjdk.java.net/jeps/173
>>
>> " The DefNew + CMS and ParNew + SerialOld combinations and the 
>> Incremental Mode of CMS will be deprecated (logging a warning 
>> message). This is to be interpreted as that these GC combinations 
>> will be removed in some upcoming major release."
>>
>> Bengt
>>>
>>> Thank you.
>>> Tao
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> Bengt
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 3/25/13 7:48 PM, Tao Mao wrote:
>>>>>>> Thank you for pointing it out, Bengt. A new webrev is updated.
>>>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~tamao/8010518/webrev.02/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Please see inline.
>>>>>>> Tao
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 3/24/13 1:16 PM, Bengt Rutisson wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi Tao,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 3/23/13 4:51 AM, Tao Mao wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Thank you for review and suggestion. A new webrev is updated.
>>>>>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~tamao/8010518/webrev.01/
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I like Jon's suggestion about removing the word "likely" but 
>>>>>>>> that means that you need to update these tests:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> test/gc/startup_warnings/TestCMSIncrementalMode.java
>>>>>>>> test/gc/startup_warnings/TestIncGC.java
>>>>>>> Test files modified.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Also, would it make sense to remove the word "likely" from the 
>>>>>>>> warning messages in Arguments::check_deprecated_gcs() too? In 
>>>>>>>> that case you need to update these tests as well:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> test/gc/startup_warnings/TestDefNewCMS.java
>>>>>>>> test/gc/startup_warnings/TestParNewSerialOld.java
>>>>>>> Have we made a decision to certainly remove these gc comb's in 
>>>>>>> future? If so, it's OK to state so. Anyway, it would be better 
>>>>>>> to resolve it with a separate CR.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Bengt
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Tao
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 3/22/13 1:56 PM, Jon Masamitsu wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Tao,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Changes look fine.  I would remove the "likely" so that 
>>>>>>>>>> messages read like
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> "and will be removed in a future release"
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Fewer words are better and the intent is still clear.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Jon
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 3/21/2013 4:23 PM, Tao Mao wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> A simple changeset. Need a reviewer!
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> 8010518 Move deprecating CMSIncrementalMode from 
>>>>>>>>>>> Arguments::check_deprecated_gcs() to 
>>>>>>>>>>> Arguments::check_deprecated_gc_flags()
>>>>>>>>>>> https://jbs.oracle.com/bugs/browse/JDK-8010518
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> webrev:
>>>>>>>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~tamao/8010518/webrev.00/
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> changeset:
>>>>>>>>>>> Cleanup suggested by Bengt.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/hotspot-gc-dev/attachments/20130419/71d46bcb/attachment.htm>