RFR 8243572: Multiple tests fail with assert(cld->klasses() != 0LL) failed: unexpected NULL for cld->klasses()
harold.seigel at oracle.com
Tue Apr 28 19:42:11 UTC 2020
Thanks for the review.
I thought that the term 'hidden classes' referred to weak hidden classes
and we would use the term 'strong hidden classes' to refer to hidden
classes that were not weak. Hence, I don't think we need to change
'hidden_classes...' to 'non_strong_hidden_classes...'.
Also, I think that 'non_strong_hidden_classes' sounds really awkward and
would prefer to either leave it as is or change to 'weak_hidden_classes'.
Does that sound okay?
On 4/28/2020 3:36 PM, Mandy Chung wrote:
> Hi Harold,
> On 4/28/20 10:27 AM, Harold Seigel wrote:
>> Open Webrev:
> This patch looks okay in general. JFR is tracking the classes loaded
> that has no strong relationship with any class loader. VM
> implementation calls such CLD that has a class mirror. In other
> words, it is only tracking the hidden classes defined with the default
> So some suggestion:
> 82 uintx _hidden_classes_count;
> rename this on to non_strong_hidden_classes_count
> 221 <Field type="boolean" name="hiddenClassLoader" label="Hidden Class Loader" />
> There is no such thing called "hidden class loader". Perhaps simply "hidden classes"?
> 727 <Field type="long" name="hiddenClassCount" label="Hidden Classes" description="Number of hidden classes" />
> 728 <Field type="ulong" contentType="bytes" name="hiddenChunkSize" label="Total Hidden Classes Chunk Size"
> 729 description="Total size of all allocated metaspace chunks for hidden classes (each chunk has several blocks)" />
> 730 <Field type="ulong" contentType="bytes" name="hiddenBlockSize" label="Total Hidden Classes Block Size"
> 731 description="Total size of all allocated metaspace blocks for hidden classes (each chunk has several blocks)" />
> what about s/hidden classes/non-strong hidden classes/?
More information about the hotspot-runtime-dev