RFC: 8136978 Much nearly duplicated code for vmError support (original) (raw)

Sebastian Sickelmann sebastian.sickelmann at gmx.de
Tue Oct 13 19:21:21 UTC 2015

Hi,

i have looked at the enhancement JDK-8136978 and have 2 solutions how this could be handled and want to ask which seems to be more "hotspot-code-style" like.

The common idea behind the change is to move os/linux/vmError_linux.cpp to os/posix/vmError_posix.cpp and change the methods appropriate. Remove of os_[]/vmError_[].cpp (for [*] = aix,bsd,solaris and linux)

I want to concentrate on the "signals stuff" in this mail.

Calls to os::Linux::ucontext_set_pc and os::Linux::ucontext_get_pc will be changed to os::Posix::....... Calls to pthread_sigmask will be replaced with os::Posix::unblock_signals(const sigset_t *set).

These methods are defined in os/posix/os_posix.hpp. I think unblock_signals should be implemented in os/[]/vm/os_[].cpp like this:

int os::Posix::unblock_signals(const sigset_t *set) {
  return pthread_sigmask(SIG_UNBLOCK, set, NULL);
}

But for ucontext_set_pc and ucontext_get_pc i see two variants:

Implement in in os/[]/vm/os_[].cpp like this:

address os::Posix::ucontext_get_pc(ucontext_t* ctx) {
  return os::Linux::ucontext_get_pc(ctx);
}

and call the existing methods from the os_cpu directory.

Or remove the ucontext_get_pc and ucontext_set_pc from the os/[]/vm/os_[].hpp and change the implementations in os_cpu//vm/os_[]_[**].cpp from os::[*]::ucontext....... to os::Posix::ucontext.........

I think the solutions are identically from the view of the compile result at least when inlining is used.

I think the first solutions would creates a smaller changeset. I think the second solution would lead to a slightly smaller codebase.

What do you think? I personally prefer the second.

-- Sebastian

More information about the hotspot-dev mailing list