Re: [External] : Re: OpenJDK 17: Loitering AbstractQueuedSynchronizer$ConditionNode instances (also on latest master branch) [JDK-8325754]

2024-02-20 Thread Viktor Klang
atform Group Oracle From: Frank Kretschmer Sent: Monday, 19 February 2024 18:07 To: Viktor Klang ; Jaikiran Pai ; Java Core Libs Subject: Re: [External] : Re: OpenJDK 17: Loitering AbstractQueuedSynchronizer$ConditionNode instances (also on latest master branch) [JDK-8325754] Hi Viktor, may

Re: [External] : Re: OpenJDK 17: Loitering AbstractQueuedSynchronizer$ConditionNode instances (also on latest master branch) [JDK-8325754]

2024-02-19 Thread Frank Kretschmer
ect:* [External] : Re: OpenJDK 17: Loitering AbstractQueuedSynchronizer$ConditionNode instances (also on latest master branch) [JDK-8325754] Hello Jaikiran, hello Viktor, in the meantime, I've seen that the JBS issue has been assigned to Viktor Klang. @Viktor: I totally agree with your comment tha

Re: [External] : Re: OpenJDK 17: Loitering AbstractQueuedSynchronizer$ConditionNode instances (also on latest master branch) [JDK-8325754]

2024-02-19 Thread Viktor Klang
enJDK 17: Loitering AbstractQueuedSynchronizer$ConditionNode instances (also on latest master branch) [JDK-8325754] Hello Jaikiran, hello Viktor, in the meantime, I've seen that the JBS issue has been assigned to Viktor Klang. @Viktor: I totally agree with your comment that the proposed sol

Re: OpenJDK 17: Loitering AbstractQueuedSynchronizer$ConditionNode instances (also on latest master branch) [JDK-8325754]

2024-02-18 Thread Frank Kretschmer
Hello Jaikiran, hello Viktor, in the meantime, I've seen that the JBS issue has been assigned to Viktor Klang. @Viktor: I totally agree with your comment that the proposed solution may not be the best possible option, and that further explorations were required. My intention to propose unlinking

Re: OpenJDK 17: Loitering AbstractQueuedSynchronizer$ConditionNode instances (also on latest master branch)

2024-02-13 Thread Jaikiran Pai
Hello Frank, I see that a JBS issue has been created for this same issue https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8325754. I don't have enough knowledge of this area and haven't reviewed this part of the code in detail to see if there are any obvious issues with what you are proposing as a soluti

Re: OpenJDK 17: Loitering AbstractQueuedSynchronizer$ConditionNode instances (also on latest master branch)

2024-02-11 Thread Frank Kretschmer
Hello Core-Libs-Dev team, may I ask you about your opinion about a tiny one-liner change in AbstractQueuedSynchronizer, just as a suggestion how to make ConditionObjects / Nodes even more garbage collector friendly? Checked out https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/jdk-17%2B35/src/java.base/share/

Re: OpenJDK 17: Loitering AbstractQueuedSynchronizer$ConditionNode instances

2024-02-08 Thread Frank Kretschmer
Hello Thomas, hello Core-Libs-Dev, thank you for cc'ing my email. In deed my idea/suggestion is to modify the AbstractQueuedSynchronizer$ConditionNode handling in such a way that it gets unlinked from the chain of condition nodes if it is not needed any more (it might be the "nextWaiter" node), i

Re: OpenJDK 17: Loitering AbstractQueuedSynchronizer$ConditionNode instances

2024-02-08 Thread Thomas Schatzl
Hi, since this looks like a suggestion for a change to the libraries similar to the mentioned JDK-6805775, and not actually GC, cc'ing the core-libs-dev mailing list. Hth, Thomas On 07.02.24 15:20, Frank Kretschmer wrote: Hi Java GC-experts, I'm facing an interesting G1 garbage collect