Mailing-List: contact harmony-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (herse.apache.org: domain of eugene.s.ostrovsky@gmail.com
 designates 64.233.182.190 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
        s=beta; d=gmail.com;
        h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references;
        b=WuNI2cYgl0aS+7FoWagTK9fDFVX5Iqh5Ku5r1Ao/mj54TtjAqLChyG+1JMqxKToxjhPMlcHOQCmEtE27eo8S+hLfNNWhgHVcMwTllwt/ikhCwvS+nIniHG6gUH6oG2f6uhqFxv7WawOLScIV4IT4oOszmUUVBdUMJTzRV0orLIg=
Message-ID: <1e3228450611100424w78277d4y4ca4c415e418dc06@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2006 15:24:00 +0300
From: "Eugene Ostrovsky" <eugene.s.ostrovsky@gmail.com>
To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [drlvm][jvmti] Profiling support - Compiled Method Load event
In-Reply-To: <1e3228450611100406n1d0ea58fp2c778fb9a3c49458@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_Part_69584_1780313.1163161440593"
References: <1e3228450611100406n1d0ea58fp2c778fb9a3c49458@mail.gmail.com>

------=_Part_69584_1780313.1163161440593
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

Opended issue  *HARMONY-2145<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-2145>
* .


On 11/10/06, Eugene Ostrovsky <eugene.s.ostrovsky@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hello All.
>
> One more "hole" in current JVMTI Profiling implementation is Compiled
> Method Load event.
>
> Current VM doesn't report this event for methods that are inlined by JIT.
> Though spec requires it to be sent for every compiled method:
> http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.5.0/docs/guide/jvmti/jvmti.html#CompiledMethodLoad
>
>
> To support the feature VM need to know about those inlined methods. Right
> now I can see two possible approaches:
>
> 1. When VM initiates method compilation, it can ask the jit about methods
> that were inlined to compiled method and report all of them.
> 2. JIT itself can notify VM about every compiled method by calling some
> special interface function after the method compilation.
>
> I'm not sure about which approach is better.
> Each of them requires additional interface function (1.- to JIT from VM;
> 2. - from VM to JIT).
>
> The second approach seems to be more complicated in terms of VM - JIT
> interaction. I mean that the following scheme "VM calls JIT's function to
> compile method. -> JIT's function in it's turn calls VM's function to notify
> about compiled methods. -> VM's function dispatches the event to TI
> agents..." introduces additional level of complexity than if "VM calls JIT's
> function to compile method. VM asks JIT about inlined methods. VM dispatches
> event to TI agents."
>
> Ideas & suggestions are welcome.
>
> Thanks,
> Eugene.
>
> On 10/24/06, Eugene Ostrovsky < eugene.s.ostrovsky@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi all.
> >
> > It seems that we have most of JVMTI implemented in drlvm. Still some of
> > profiling support features is left.
> > I'm going to take a look on "VM Object Allocation" event.
> > I'll try to come up with design tomorrow.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Eugene.
> >
> >
>

------=_Part_69584_1780313.1163161440593--