Parallel GC and array object layout: way off the base and laid out in reverse?

Aleksey Shipilev aleksey.shipilev at
Wed Sep 4 20:34:36 UTC 2013

Here you have it, thanks Igor. 
Any reference to the relevant block of code?
I can probably try to fix this in background.


On 05.09.2013, at 0:00, Igor Veresov <iggy.veresov at> wrote:

> Yup, that's a depth-first array-scanning quirk. The work-stealing is done using stacks, so in order to have the first fields followed first the references need to be put of stack in reverse. That's done for regular objects but for arrays it's not. 
> igor
> On Sep 4, 2013, at 12:51 PM, Aleksey Shipilev <aleksey.shipilev at> wrote:
>> Hi Jon,
>> On 09/04/2013 10:19 PM, Jon Masamitsu wrote:
>>> I haven't followed this thread carefully enough but the ParallelGC 
>>> collector uses a depth-first traversal while the other collectors use
>>> a breadth-first. Would that explain the difference?
>> The referenced objects in the array are the leaves in reachability
>> graph. I thought there is no difference in depth- vs. breadth-first in
>> this case? It looks more like we record the traversed objects on some
>> LIFO structure, which polls the elements in the reverse order.
>> -Aleksey.

More information about the hotspot-gc-dev mailing list