mirror of
https://github.com/openjdk/jdk.git
synced 2025-09-21 11:34:38 +02:00
6807801: CMS: could save/restore fewer header words during scavenge
Age bits need not enter the mark-word preservation calculus; also affected, in addition to CMS, per CR synopsis above, were ParNew (but not DefNew), ParallelScavenge and G1, albeit to a lesser degree than CMS. Reviewed-by: tonyp, johnc
This commit is contained in:
parent
b2fa4708ad
commit
41bf31bff4
6 changed files with 37 additions and 21 deletions
|
@ -3958,8 +3958,6 @@ void G1CollectedHeap::remove_self_forwarding_pointers() {
|
|||
// Now restore saved marks, if any.
|
||||
if (_objs_with_preserved_marks != NULL) {
|
||||
assert(_preserved_marks_of_objs != NULL, "Both or none.");
|
||||
assert(_objs_with_preserved_marks->length() ==
|
||||
_preserved_marks_of_objs->length(), "Both or none.");
|
||||
guarantee(_objs_with_preserved_marks->length() ==
|
||||
_preserved_marks_of_objs->length(), "Both or none.");
|
||||
for (int i = 0; i < _objs_with_preserved_marks->length(); i++) {
|
||||
|
@ -4054,7 +4052,10 @@ void G1CollectedHeap::handle_evacuation_failure_common(oop old, markOop m) {
|
|||
}
|
||||
|
||||
void G1CollectedHeap::preserve_mark_if_necessary(oop obj, markOop m) {
|
||||
if (m != markOopDesc::prototype()) {
|
||||
assert(evacuation_failed(), "Oversaving!");
|
||||
// We want to call the "for_promotion_failure" version only in the
|
||||
// case of a promotion failure.
|
||||
if (m->must_be_preserved_for_promotion_failure(obj)) {
|
||||
if (_objs_with_preserved_marks == NULL) {
|
||||
assert(_preserved_marks_of_objs == NULL, "Both or none.");
|
||||
_objs_with_preserved_marks =
|
||||
|
|
|
@ -1058,10 +1058,11 @@ bool ParNewGeneration::is_legal_forward_ptr(oop p) {
|
|||
#endif
|
||||
|
||||
void ParNewGeneration::preserve_mark_if_necessary(oop obj, markOop m) {
|
||||
if ((m != markOopDesc::prototype()) &&
|
||||
(!UseBiasedLocking || (m != markOopDesc::biased_locking_prototype()))) {
|
||||
if (m->must_be_preserved_for_promotion_failure(obj)) {
|
||||
// We should really have separate per-worker stacks, rather
|
||||
// than use locking of a common pair of stacks.
|
||||
MutexLocker ml(ParGCRareEvent_lock);
|
||||
DefNewGeneration::preserve_mark_if_necessary(obj, m);
|
||||
preserve_mark(obj, m);
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
|
@ -694,6 +694,8 @@ void PSScavenge::clean_up_failed_promotion() {
|
|||
void PSScavenge::oop_promotion_failed(oop obj, markOop obj_mark) {
|
||||
_promotion_failed = true;
|
||||
if (obj_mark->must_be_preserved_for_promotion_failure(obj)) {
|
||||
// Should use per-worker private stakcs hetre rather than
|
||||
// locking a common pair of stacks.
|
||||
ThreadCritical tc;
|
||||
_preserved_oop_stack.push(obj);
|
||||
_preserved_mark_stack.push(obj_mark);
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Add table
Add a link
Reference in a new issue