RFR: 8081682: AbstractWorkGang::_terminate is never used

Kim Barrett kim.barrett at oracle.com
Wed Jun 3 16:46:11 UTC 2015


On Jun 3, 2015, at 5:31 AM, Stefan Karlsson <stefan.karlsson at oracle.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On 2015-06-03 10:07, Stefan Karlsson wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> On 2015-06-03 01:06, Kim Barrett wrote:
>>> On Jun 2, 2015, at 9:51 AM, Stefan Karlsson <stefan.karlsson at oracle.com> wrote:
>>>> Hi all,
>>>> 
>>>> Please review this patch to remove the AbstractWorkGang::_terminate variable. The work gangs are never deleted and therefore the code which sets _terminate is never executed.
>>>> 
>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~stefank/8081682/webrev.00/
>>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8081682
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> StefanK
>>> I assume the idea here is that, rather than having a (presently
>>> unused) generic early stop request mechanism provided by the workgroup
>>> framework, any workgroup that needs an early stop mechanism should
>>> roll its own.
>> 
>> Yes, for the time being.  If we later find a compelling reason to add a used, tested stop mechanism to the workgroup then we should do it.
>> 
>> 
>>>   Are there any that already do so,
>> 
>> One example is CMConcurrentMarkingTask.
>> 
>>>  and could have been
>>> using the generic mechanism?
>> 
>> I don't know.
> 
> I realize that we might be talking about different stop mechanisms.
> 1) A stop mechanism to tear down and exit the worker threads.
> 2) A stop mechanism to abort the current executing task.
> 
> I'm removing the code for (1), while the CMConcurrentMarkingTask has its own mechanism for (2).
> 
> I discussed this briefly with Per, and we probably want to reimplement (1) and tear down all the worker threads when DestroyJavaVM is called. However, that will be handled as a separate RFE.

That all sounds fine to me.

> 
> StefanK
> 
>> 
>>> 
>>> The changes look ok.
>>> 
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> StefanK




More information about the hotspot-gc-dev mailing list