On Wed, 18 Jun 2025 18:23:58 GMT, Coleen Phillimore <cole...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> This PR contains changes for the 1st phase of the `LockingMode` flag >> obsoletion. >> >> The work is done by @fbredber, I have taken it over and am finishing it >> while he's on vacation. >> >> In the 1st phase one keeps the `LockingMode` variable in all places, but >> makes it non-settable from the command line. All the C1 and C2 code related >> to legacy locking will still be in place (but as dead code) and removed >> later (phase 2). >> >> Lightweight locking is the default locking from now on. >> >> Tested in tiers 1 - 7. > > test/hotspot/jtreg/runtime/Monitor/TestRecursiveLocking.java line 125: > >> 123: public class TestRecursiveLocking { >> 124: static final WhiteBox WB = WhiteBox.getWhiteBox(); >> 125: static final boolean flagHeavyMonitors = >> WB.getBooleanVMFlag("VerifyHeavyMonitors"); > > I think you should take out the VerifyHeavyMonitors cases. @fbredber > originally had that flag turn on a the reintroduced UseHeavyMonitors option > but the UseHeavyMonitors option doesn't actually do that with this change. I > don't think this test will pass with -XX:+VerifyHeavyMonitors. > If we reintroduce UseHeavyMonitors, save this diff and fix this test then. > Right now it's not correct. Removed in the latest commit. > test/hotspot/jtreg/runtime/lockStack/TestLockStackCapacity.java line 42: > >> 40: public class TestLockStackCapacity { >> 41: static final WhiteBox WB = WhiteBox.getWhiteBox(); >> 42: static final boolean flagHeavyMonitors = >> WB.getBooleanVMFlag("VerifyHeavyMonitors"); > > I think this should also not have cases for VerifyHeavyMonitors. We can add > back tests if we want UseHeavyMonitors. As of now, removing the Legacy > locking code will remove code that reaches the VerifyHeavyMonitors branches. Removed in the latest commit. > test/jtreg-ext/requires/VMProps.java line 424: > >> 422: * Note: Lightweight locking does not support RTM (for now). >> 423: */ >> 424: protected String vmRTMCompiler() { > > There's an issue to remove this function since it's now unused. Removed in the latest commit. ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/25847#discussion_r2161282585 PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/25847#discussion_r2161282345 PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/25847#discussion_r2161282101