Uploaded image for project: 'JDK'
  1. JDK
  2. JDK-8069149

jdk.internal.pref.Perf is unaware of the VM option UsePerfData



    • Type: Enhancement
    • Status: Open
    • Priority: P4
    • Resolution: Unresolved
    • Affects Version/s: 8u60, 9
    • Fix Version/s: tbd
    • Component/s: core-svc


      On 13/01/2015 3:10 PM, David Holmes wrote:
      > Hi Dmitry,
      > Short version: okay but I'm going to file a bug to have sun.misc.Perf
      > fixed properly.
      > Long version ... read below :)
      > Thanks,
      > David
      > On 12/01/2015 11:49 PM, Dmitry Samersoff wrote:
      >> Hi Everybody,
      >> Please review the fix.
      >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dsamersoff/JDK-7076820/webrev.01/
      >> The fix explicitly checks for UsePerfData and if it's false make
      >> Perf:detach a NOP.
      > That sidesteps the assertion failure but there is a bigger semantic
      > issue here I think - which is why the bug has remained open for so long.
      > UsePerfData can disable a part of the backend of the "perf"
      > functionality used via sun.misc.Perf, but sun.misc.Perf is completely
      > oblivious to that. It isn't even really clear what UsePerfData pertains
      > to. It impacts PerfMemory turning a number of methods into no-ops - but
      > it doesn't turn PerfMemory::attach nor PerfMemory::detach into no-ops.
      > What is a no-op is the initialization of PerfMemory (perfMemory_init)
      > during VM startup, and also the teardown (perfMemory_exit) during VM
      > shutdown (via at_exit handler). So the VM responds to the -UsePerfData
      > flag (in part) by not initializing the PerfMemory subsystem, but the
      > PerfMemory public apis are still enabled and invoked from the JDK code.
      > That doesn't make sense to me - we should fail to attach and in doing so
      > not put in place the Cleaner code that will attempt the detach. But
      > sun.misc.Perf doesn't understand that anything can fail. :(




            Unassigned Unassigned
            dholmes David Holmes
            0 Vote for this issue
            5 Start watching this issue