RFR 8245240: Shenandoah: support nesting evacuation OOM scope
rkennke at redhat.com
Tue May 19 21:23:06 UTC 2020
On Tue, 2020-05-19 at 23:14 +0200, Aleksey Shipilev wrote:
> On 5/19/20 9:38 PM, Roman Kennke wrote:
> > I don't have a strong opinion regarding packed fields or separate
> > fields. Bitfield access seems slightly awkward (I had to look it up
> > to
> > see what it actually is), otoh, space is limited in TL, so... ?
> I would prefer separate fields to make the code clearer. Are we
> really down to squeezing in a new
> byte in TL?
True. As long as it fits and doesn't exceed the current limit, I guess
we're ok. I expect that it also means simpler generated machine code.
More information about the hotspot-gc-dev