RFR(S): 8210514: Obsolete SyncVerbose

Daniel D. Daugherty daniel.daugherty at oracle.com
Fri Sep 7 21:30:24 UTC 2018

On 9/7/18 5:14 PM, Mikael Vidstedt wrote:
> Please review this change which obsoletes the SyncVerbose flag.
> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8210514 <https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8210514>
> Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mikael/webrevs/8210514/webrev.00/open/webrev/ <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mikael/webrevs/8210514/webrev.00/open/webrev/>

     L1303:   if (SafepointMechanism::poll(Self)) {
         You don't want to drop the poll() call.

     There are also TEVENT macro calls that you can keep
     if you rewrite the macro to use logging instead.

     No comments.

     No comments.

     Hmmm... I don't agree with this one....

     L325: #define TEVENT(nom) { if (SyncVerbose) FEVENT(nom); }
         I recommend changing the SyncVerbose into an is-logging-enabled
         check for a new monitor logging tag.

     L332:       tty->print_cr("INFO: " #nom " : %d", v);  \
         I recommend changing the print_cr() into a logging call.

     L333:       tty->flush();
         I don't think logging needs a flush.

     These are all TEVENT macro calls that you can keep
     if you rewrite the macro to use logging instead.


> * Background (from bug)
> The experimental SyncVerbose flag can in theory be used to produce logging of some synchronization primitives. The flag was convenient when the synchronization implementation was implemented and tuned a long time ago.
> The SyncVerbose flag no longer serves the purpose it used to, and is "Unstable" (the documentation of the flag says so explicitly). It should be obsoleted and later removed.
> Testing: I’m running the normal tier1 testing (still in progress).
> Cheers,
> Mikael

More information about the hotspot-runtime-dev mailing list