RFR(XS): 8005875: G1: Kitchensink fails with ParallelGCThreads=0
vitalyd at gmail.com
Fri Feb 1 00:05:53 UTC 2013
I think the following assert can be strengthened a bit to be:
assert((_parallel_workers == NULL && parallel_marking_threads() == 0)||
513 parallel_marking_threads() > 0,
514 "parallel workers not set up correctly");
Don't know whether to also verify max_parallel_marking_ threads() == 0
there - may be too paranoid.
Looks good otherwise.
Sent from my phone
On Jan 31, 2013 5:09 PM, "John Cuthbertson" <john.cuthbertson at oracle.com>
> Hi Everyone,
> Here's a new webrev based upon feedback from Vitaly and Bengt:
> I've wrapped the check with the asserts suggested by Bengt into a small
> GC test suite with ConcGCThreads=3
> Kitchensink with ParallelGCThreads=0:
> On 1/8/2013 2:13 PM, John Cuthbertson wrote:
>> Hi Everyone,
>> Can I please have a couple of volunteers look over the fix for this CR -
>> the webrev can be found at: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~**
>> One of the modules in the Kitchensink test generates a VM_PrintThreads vm
>> operation. The JVM crashes when it tries to print out G1's concurrent
>> marking worker threads when ParallelGCThreads=0 because the work gang has
>> not been created. The fix is to add the same check that's used elsewhere in
>> G1's concurrent marking.
>> Kitchensink with ParallelGCThreads=0
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the hotspot-gc-dev