RFR (XXS): 8133043: Clean up code related to termination stats printing
thomas.schatzl at oracle.com
Wed Aug 5 15:55:13 UTC 2015
On Wed, 2015-08-05 at 08:52 -0700, Jon Masamitsu wrote:
> You substituted _queue_num for i (worker_id) in
> - i, elapsed_ms, s_roots_ms, s_roots_ms * 100 / elapsed_ms,
> + _queue_num, elapsed_ms, s_roots_ms, s_roots_ms * 100 / elapsed_ms,
> I can see how _queue_num would be more interesting but is worker_id just
> of no value so it is not worth printing? I don't have any perspective
> on this
> so I'm not objecting to dropping the worker_id. Just wondering if
> less is better. And you can push it as is.
The original code passed worker_id as "i" here, however, _queue_num ==
If you look at g1CollectedHeap.cpp line 4514, the code passes worker_id
to the ParScanThreadState, that is _queue_num.
A later patch also for review changes _queue_num to _worker_id, and then
it becomes clear again.
> Rest looks good.
Thanks for the review,
More information about the hotspot-gc-dev