Make sure that two marking cycles do not overlap, i.e., a new one can only start after the concurrent marking thread finishes all its work. In the fix I piggy-back a couple of minor extra fixes: some general code reformatting for consistency (only around the code I modified), the removal of a field (G1CollectorPolicy::_should_initiate_conc_mark) which doesn't seem to be used at all (it's only set but never read), as well as moving the "is GC locker active" test earlier into the G1 pause / Full GC and using a more appropriate method for it.
Reviewed-by: johnc, jmasa, jcoomes, ysr
Calling the methods region_stack_push() and region_stack_pop() concurrent is not MT-safe. The assumption is that we will only call region_stack_push() during a GC pause and region_stack_pop() during marking. Unfortunately, we also call region_stack_push() during marking which seems to be introducing subtle marking failures. This change introduces lock-based methods for pushing / popping to be called during marking.
Reviewed-by: iveresov, johnc
Newly-created threads always had the active field of their SATB queue initialized to false, even if they were created during marking. As a result, updates from threads created during a marking cycle were never enqueued and never processed. The fix includes remaining a method from active() to is_active() for readability and naming consistency.
Reviewed-by: ysr, johnc
If CM task was aborted while scanning the last object of the specified region and the size of that object is equal to bitmap's granularity then the next offset would be equal or over the region limit which is exactly what the assertion states.
Reviewed-by: ysr, tonyp, jmasa
Removing the concurrent overhead tracker from G1, along with the GC overhead reporter and the G1AccountConcurrentOverhead (both of which rely on the the concurrent overhead tracker).
Reviewed-by: iveresov, johnc
RSet scrubbing incorrectly deletes RSet entries that point to regions tagged as "continues humongous" due to a race when RSet scrubbing iterates over regions in parallel.
Reviewed-by: apetrusenko, iveresov
For current soft-ref clearing policies, we can decide at marking time if a soft-reference will definitely not be cleared, postponing the decision of whether it will definitely be cleared to the final reference processing phase. This can be especially beneficial in the case of concurrent collectors where the marking is usually concurrent but reference processing is usually not.
Reviewed-by: jmasa
