RFR (XS) JDK-8153582 Logging of ConcGCThreads is done too early
joseph.provino at oracle.com
Tue May 17 19:17:19 UTC 2016
I changed the log level to debug and added created a test.
On 5/13/2016 6:55 AM, Thomas Schatzl wrote:
> On Thu, 2016-05-12 at 13:47 -0400, Joseph Provino wrote:
>> Please review this very small change to log ConcGCThreads
>> and ParallelGCThreads correctly.
>> Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jprovino/8153582/webrev.00
>> CR: JDK-8153582Logging of ConcGCThreads is done too early
>> Messages look like below.
>> java -Xlog:gc=trace -XX:+PrintFlagsFinal -version
>> [0.002s][trace][gc] MarkStackSize: 4096k MarkStackSizeMax: 16384k
>> [0.038s][trace][gc] ConcGCThreads: 5
>> [0.039s][trace][gc] ParallelGCThreads: 18
>> [0.056s][info ][gc] Using G1
>> java -Xlog:gc=trace -XX:+PrintFlagsFinal -XX:+UseConcMarkSweepGC
>> [0.002s][trace][gc] MarkStackSize: 4096k MarkStackSizeMax: 524288k
>> [1.001s][trace][gc] ConcGCThreads: 5
>> [1.001s][trace][gc] ParallelGCThreads: 18
>> [1.015s][info ][gc] Using Concurrent Mark Sweep
> - not sure if this is "trace" level worthy, maybe debug level would
> be more appropriate. Not opposed to using trace level, just questioning
> the reason for using trace level here.
> It does not look too detailed yet.
> - could you please use the latest webrev script available on http://o
> penjdk.java.net/guide/webrevHelp.html in the future? The added links to
> the next/pref changed file are a great addition.
> - please add a small test case that checks the output.
More information about the hotspot-dev