Skip to content

8357944: Remove unused CollectedHeap::is_maximal_no_gc #25482

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

albertnetymk
Copy link
Member

@albertnetymk albertnetymk commented May 28, 2025

Removing effectively dead code/API for all GCs except G1.


Progress

  • Change must be properly reviewed (1 review required, with at least 1 Reviewer)
  • Change must not contain extraneous whitespace
  • Commit message must refer to an issue

Issue

  • JDK-8357944: Remove unused CollectedHeap::is_maximal_no_gc (Enhancement - P4)

Reviewers

Reviewing

Using git

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/25482/head:pull/25482
$ git checkout pull/25482

Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/25482
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/25482/head

Using Skara CLI tools

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 25482

View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 25482

Using diff file

Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/25482.diff

Using Webrev

Link to Webrev Comment

@bridgekeeper
Copy link

bridgekeeper bot commented May 28, 2025

👋 Welcome back ayang! A progress list of the required criteria for merging this PR into master will be added to the body of your pull request. There are additional pull request commands available for use with this pull request.

@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented May 28, 2025

@albertnetymk This change now passes all automated pre-integration checks.

ℹ️ This project also has non-automated pre-integration requirements. Please see the file CONTRIBUTING.md for details.

After integration, the commit message for the final commit will be:

8357944: Remove unused CollectedHeap::is_maximal_no_gc

Reviewed-by: jsikstro, tschatzl

You can use pull request commands such as /summary, /contributor and /issue to adjust it as needed.

At the time when this comment was updated there had been 92 new commits pushed to the master branch:

As there are no conflicts, your changes will automatically be rebased on top of these commits when integrating. If you prefer to avoid this automatic rebasing, please check the documentation for the /integrate command for further details.

➡️ To integrate this PR with the above commit message to the master branch, type /integrate in a new comment.

@openjdk openjdk bot changed the title 8357944 8357944: Remove unused CollectedHeap::is_maximal_no_gc May 28, 2025
@openjdk openjdk bot added the rfr Pull request is ready for review label May 28, 2025
@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented May 28, 2025

@albertnetymk The following labels will be automatically applied to this pull request:

  • hotspot-gc
  • shenandoah

When this pull request is ready to be reviewed, an "RFR" email will be sent to the corresponding mailing lists. If you would like to change these labels, use the /label pull request command.

@openjdk openjdk bot added hotspot-gc hotspot-gc-dev@openjdk.org shenandoah shenandoah-dev@openjdk.org labels May 28, 2025
@mlbridge
Copy link

mlbridge bot commented May 28, 2025

Webrevs

Copy link
Member

@jsikstro jsikstro left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good. This code is quite old, but I wonder if it's also appropriate to rename is_maximal_no_gc() to something more descriptive, maybe is_expandable() and reverse the check, which I think looks better at the callers of is_maximal_no_gc(). Not sure if that should be done separately or not though, and I don't have strong opinions on G1 code.

@albertnetymk
Copy link
Member Author

I wonder if it's also appropriate to rename is_maximal_no_gc() to something more descriptive ...

I agree the current name is not very nice. I am leaned towards changing its return-type also: uint num_inactive_regions() const { return _hrm.num_inactive_regions(); }. However, I feel that discussion can get its own ticket.

@openjdk openjdk bot added the ready Pull request is ready to be integrated label Jun 2, 2025
@albertnetymk
Copy link
Member Author

Thanks for review.

/integrate

@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Jun 2, 2025

Going to push as commit 6418306.
Since your change was applied there have been 93 commits pushed to the master branch:

Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts.

@openjdk openjdk bot added the integrated Pull request has been integrated label Jun 2, 2025
@openjdk openjdk bot closed this Jun 2, 2025
@openjdk openjdk bot removed ready Pull request is ready to be integrated rfr Pull request is ready for review labels Jun 2, 2025
@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Jun 2, 2025

@albertnetymk Pushed as commit 6418306.

💡 You may see a message that your pull request was closed with unmerged commits. This can be safely ignored.

@albertnetymk albertnetymk deleted the remove-heap-api branch June 2, 2025 08:25
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
hotspot-gc hotspot-gc-dev@openjdk.org integrated Pull request has been integrated shenandoah shenandoah-dev@openjdk.org
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants