Skip to content

Added the ability to specify a Spin Count Unit via a GC Configuration to release/7.0 - #84495

Merged
mrsharm merged 2 commits into
dotnet:release/7.0-stagingfrom
mrsharm:port_spincount
Apr 27, 2023
Merged

Added the ability to specify a Spin Count Unit via a GC Configuration to release/7.0#84495
mrsharm merged 2 commits into
dotnet:release/7.0-stagingfrom
mrsharm:port_spincount

Conversation

@mrsharm

@mrsharmmrsharm commented Apr 7, 2023•
edited
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Added the ability to specify a Spin Count Unit via a GC Configuration for the release/7.0-staging branch and make use of this value in the SetYieldProcessorScalingFactor function if the value is valid. If this configuration is not specified, we default to 0 and fall back to the original logic.

This PR is port of #84339 as automatic merging failed.

Customer impact

There were performance regressions experienced by customers related to this fix that resulted in an increase in the Spin Count Unit. This PR allows the ability to hardcode that value.

Testing

Tested manually and verified by a customer that the fix reverted the regression.

Risk

Low. The setting is not enabled by default and has to be explicitly set by the user for the conditional logic to work.

@ghostghost added the area-GC-coreclr label Apr 7, 2023
@ghostghost assigned mrsharmApr 7, 2023
@ghost

ghost commented Apr 7, 2023

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Tagging subscribers to this area: @dotnet/gc
See info in area-owners.md if you want to be subscribed.

Issue Details

Added the ability to specify a Spin Count Unit via a GC Configuration for the release/7.0 branch and make use of this value in the SetYieldProcessorScalingFactor function if the value is valid. If this configuration is not specified, we default to 0 and fall back to the original logic.

This PR is port of #84339 as automatic merging failed.

Author:mrsharm
Assignees:mrsharm
Labels:

area-GC-coreclr

Milestone:-

@mrsharmmrsharm added the Servicing-consider Issue for next servicing release review label Apr 7, 2023
@teo-tsirpanis

teo-tsirpanis commented Apr 7, 2023

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@mrsharm you have to target the release/7.0-staging branch.

@teo-tsirpanisteo-tsirpanis added this to the 7.0.x milestone Apr 7, 2023
@JulieLeeMSFTJulieLeeMSFT removed the Servicing-consider Issue for next servicing release review label Apr 7, 2023
@JulieLeeMSFT

JulieLeeMSFT commented Apr 7, 2023

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@mrsharm, I am removing the servicing consider label until it is reviewed and all the tests are passed.

Maoni0
Maoni0 reviewed Apr 7, 2023
View reviewed changes
Comment threadsrc/coreclr/gc/gc.cpp Outdated
@mrsharm
mrsharm changed the base branch from release/7.0 to release/7.0-stagingApril 8, 2023 01:14
@mrsharm
mrsharm marked this pull request as ready for review April 8, 2023 01:16
@carlossanlop

carlossanlop commented Apr 10, 2023•
edited
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@mrsharm today is code complete. If you want this fix included in the May Servicing release, please get it ready by 4pm PT today:

  • Get the Tactics approval ASAP (and once approved, please add the Servicing-approved label to unblock the check-service-labels CI action)
  • Confirm the CI failures are unrelated
  • Get a sign-off from another area owner

No OOB changes needed since this is a native code change.

@JulieLeeMSFT

JulieLeeMSFT commented Apr 10, 2023

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

cc @jeffschwMSFT for servicing consider.

@Maoni0

Maoni0 commented Apr 10, 2023

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

both @mrsharm and @mangod9 are out of office and I was not informed this needed to be in for the next servicing release when we were going through issues last week. so I will assume this does not need to get in right now and let them handle it when they are back.

@JulieLeeMSFT

JulieLeeMSFT commented Apr 10, 2023

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@mrsharm, please update the issue following the template for servicing fix (refer #84444).

@mangod9

mangod9 commented Apr 11, 2023

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Correct, we are still waiting for customer validation on this and will merge when we have confirmation.

@mrsharmmrsharm added the Servicing-consider Issue for next servicing release review label Apr 26, 2023
jeffschwMSFT
jeffschwMSFT approved these changes Apr 26, 2023
View reviewed changes

@jeffschwMSFTjeffschwMSFT left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

approved. we will bring for consideration in 7.0.x

@rbhandarbhanda modified the milestones: 7.0.x, 7.0.7Apr 27, 2023
@rbhandarbhanda added Servicing-approved Approved for servicing release and removed Servicing-consider Issue for next servicing release review labels Apr 27, 2023
@mrsharm
mrsharm merged commit 3a80b29 into dotnet:release/7.0-stagingApr 27, 2023
@ghostghost locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators May 28, 2023
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.

Reviewers

@jeffschwMSFTjeffschwMSFTjeffschwMSFT approved these changes
@Maoni0Maoni0Maoni0 approved these changes
@cshungcshungAwaiting requested review from cshung
@eduardo-vpeduardo-vpAwaiting requested review from eduardo-vp
@mangod9mangod9Awaiting requested review from mangod9

Assignees

@mrsharmmrsharm

Labels

area-GC-coreclrServicing-approvedApproved for servicing release

Projects

None yet

Milestone

7.0.7

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

8 participants

@mrsharm@teo-tsirpanis@JulieLeeMSFT@carlossanlop@Maoni0@mangod9@jeffschwMSFT@rbhanda
, 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { // Add copy buttons to all 
 blocks
(function() {
function addCopyButtons() {
document.querySelectorAll('pre code').forEach(function(codeBlock) {
if (codeBlock.parentElement.hasAttribute('data-copy-added')) return;
codeBlock.parentElement.setAttribute('data-copy-added', 'true');
var btn = document.createElement('button');
btn.textContent = 'Copy';
btn.style.cssText = 'position:absolute;top:4px;right:4px;padding:2px 8px;font-size:11px;background:#4ecdc4;border:none;border-radius:4px;color:#1a1a2e;cursor:pointer;opacity:0.7;transition:opacity 0.2s;';
btn.onmouseover = function() { this.style.opacity = '1'; };
btn.onmouseout = function() { this.style.opacity = '0.7'; };
btn.onclick = function() {
navigator.clipboard.writeText(codeBlock.textContent).then(function() {
btn.textContent = 'Copied!';
setTimeout(function() { btn.textContent = 'Copy'; }, 1500);
});
};
codeBlock.parentElement.style.position = 'relative';
codeBlock.parentElement.appendChild(btn);
});
}
addCopyButtons();
// Re-run on dynamic content
var observer = new MutationObserver(addCopyButtons);
observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Add Copy Buttons to Code Blocks]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "github.com";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + "github\\.com" + '
Added the ability to specify a Spin Count Unit via a GC Configuration to release/7.0 by mrsharm · Pull Request #84495 · dotnet/runtime · GitHub
Skip to content
Added the ability to specify a Spin Count Unit via a GC Configuration to release/7.0 - #84495
Merged
mrsharm merged 2 commits into
dotnet:release/7.0-stagingfrom 
mrsharm:port_spincount
Apr 27, 2023
Merged
Added the ability to specify a Spin Count Unit via a GC Configuration to release/7.0#84495
mrsharm merged 2 commits into
dotnet:release/7.0-stagingfrom 
mrsharm:port_spincount
Conversation
@mrsharm
@mrsharmmrsharm
commented
Apr 7, 2023•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Added the ability to specify a Spin Count Unit via a GC Configuration for the release/7.0-staging branch and make use of this value in the SetYieldProcessorScalingFactor function if the value is valid. If this configuration is not specified, we default to 0 and fall back to the original logic.
This PR is port of #84339 as automatic merging failed.
Customer impact
There were performance regressions experienced by customers related to this fix that resulted in an increase in the Spin Count Unit. This PR allows the ability to hardcode that value.
Testing
Tested manually and verified by a customer that the fix reverted the regression.
Risk
Low. The setting is not enabled by default and has to be explicitly set by the user for the conditional logic to work.
@ghostghost
added
the 
area-GC-coreclr

label
Apr 7, 2023
@ghostghost
assigned mrsharmApr 7, 2023
@ghost
ghost
commented
Apr 7, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Tagging subscribers to this area: @dotnet/gc

See info in area-owners.md if you want to be subscribed.
Issue Details
Added the ability to specify a Spin Count Unit via a GC Configuration for the release/7.0 branch and make use of this value in the SetYieldProcessorScalingFactor function if the value is valid. If this configuration is not specified, we default to 0 and fall back to the original logic.
This PR is port of #84339 as automatic merging failed.
Author:mrsharm
Assignees:mrsharm
Labels:
area-GC-coreclr
Milestone:-
@mrsharmmrsharm
added
the 
Servicing-consider
Issue for next servicing release review
label
Apr 7, 2023
@teo-tsirpanis
teo-tsirpanis
commented
Apr 7, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
@mrsharm you have to target the release/7.0-staging branch.
@teo-tsirpanisteo-tsirpanis
added this to the 7.0.x milestone
Apr 7, 2023
@JulieLeeMSFTJulieLeeMSFT
removed
the 
Servicing-consider
Issue for next servicing release review
label
Apr 7, 2023
@JulieLeeMSFT
JulieLeeMSFT
commented
Apr 7, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
@mrsharm, I am removing the servicing consider label until it is reviewed and all the tests are passed.
Maoni0
Maoni0
reviewed
Apr 7, 2023
View reviewed changes
Comment threadsrc/coreclr/gc/gc.cpp
Outdated

@mrsharm
mrsharm
changed the base branch from
release/7.0
to
release/7.0-stagingApril 8, 2023 01:14
@mrsharm
mrsharm
marked this pull request as ready for review
April 8, 2023 01:16
@carlossanlop
carlossanlop
commented
Apr 10, 2023•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
@mrsharm today is code complete. If you want this fix included in the May Servicing release, please get it ready by 4pm PT today:
  •  Get the Tactics approval ASAP (and once approved, please add the Servicing-approved label to unblock the check-service-labels CI action)
  •  Confirm the CI failures are unrelated
  •  Get a sign-off from another area owner
No OOB changes needed since this is a native code change.
@JulieLeeMSFT
JulieLeeMSFT
commented
Apr 10, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
cc @jeffschwMSFT for servicing consider.
@Maoni0
Maoni0
commented
Apr 10, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
both @mrsharm and @mangod9 are out of office and I was not informed this needed to be in for the next servicing release when we were going through issues last week. so I will assume this does not need to get in right now and let them handle it when they are back.
@JulieLeeMSFT
JulieLeeMSFT
commented
Apr 10, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
@mrsharm, please update the issue following the template for servicing fix (refer #84444).
@mangod9
mangod9
commented
Apr 11, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Correct, we are still waiting for customer validation on this and will merge when we have confirmation.
@mrsharmmrsharm
added
the 
Servicing-consider
Issue for next servicing release review
label
Apr 26, 2023
jeffschwMSFT
jeffschwMSFT
approved these changes
Apr 26, 2023
View reviewed changes
@jeffschwMSFTjeffschwMSFT
left a comment


Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

approved. we will bring for consideration in 7.0.x
@rbhandarbhanda
modified the milestones:
7.0.x, 7.0.7Apr 27, 2023
@rbhandarbhanda
added

Servicing-approved
Approved for servicing release
and removed

Servicing-consider
Issue for next servicing release review
labels
Apr 27, 2023
@mrsharm
mrsharm
merged commit 3a80b29
into
dotnet:release/7.0-stagingApr 27, 2023
@ghostghost
locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators
May 28, 2023
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.


Reviewers

@jeffschwMSFTjeffschwMSFTjeffschwMSFT approved these changes
@Maoni0Maoni0Maoni0 approved these changes
@cshungcshungAwaiting requested review from cshung
@eduardo-vpeduardo-vpAwaiting requested review from eduardo-vp
@mangod9mangod9Awaiting requested review from mangod9

Assignees

@mrsharmmrsharm

Labels

area-GC-coreclrServicing-approvedApproved for servicing release

Projects


None yet


Milestone

7.0.7

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

8 participants

@mrsharm@teo-tsirpanis@JulieLeeMSFT@carlossanlop@Maoni0@mangod9@jeffschwMSFT@rbhanda

, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
// Force GitHub README to respect dark mode
(function() {
var style = document.createElement('style');
style.textContent = '
.markdown-body {
color-scheme: dark light;
}
.markdown-body pre { background: #161b22 !important; }
.markdown-body code { background: rgba(110, 118, 129, 0.4) !important; }
.markdown-body table th, .markdown-body table td { border-color: #30363d !important; }
.markdown-body img { background: #0d1117; }
.markdown-body blockquote { border-left-color: #8b949e; }
.markdown-body hr { border-color: #30363d; }
';
document.head.appendChild(style);
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:GitHub Dark Mode README Fix]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "*";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
Added the ability to specify a Spin Count Unit via a GC Configuration to release/7.0 by mrsharm · Pull Request #84495 · dotnet/runtime · GitHub
Skip to content
Added the ability to specify a Spin Count Unit via a GC Configuration to release/7.0 - #84495
Merged
mrsharm merged 2 commits into
dotnet:release/7.0-stagingfrom 
mrsharm:port_spincount
Apr 27, 2023
Merged
Added the ability to specify a Spin Count Unit via a GC Configuration to release/7.0#84495
mrsharm merged 2 commits into
dotnet:release/7.0-stagingfrom 
mrsharm:port_spincount
Conversation
@mrsharm
@mrsharmmrsharm
commented
Apr 7, 2023•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Added the ability to specify a Spin Count Unit via a GC Configuration for the release/7.0-staging branch and make use of this value in the SetYieldProcessorScalingFactor function if the value is valid. If this configuration is not specified, we default to 0 and fall back to the original logic.
This PR is port of #84339 as automatic merging failed.
Customer impact
There were performance regressions experienced by customers related to this fix that resulted in an increase in the Spin Count Unit. This PR allows the ability to hardcode that value.
Testing
Tested manually and verified by a customer that the fix reverted the regression.
Risk
Low. The setting is not enabled by default and has to be explicitly set by the user for the conditional logic to work.
@ghostghost
added
the 
area-GC-coreclr

label
Apr 7, 2023
@ghostghost
assigned mrsharmApr 7, 2023
@ghost
ghost
commented
Apr 7, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Tagging subscribers to this area: @dotnet/gc

See info in area-owners.md if you want to be subscribed.
Issue Details
Added the ability to specify a Spin Count Unit via a GC Configuration for the release/7.0 branch and make use of this value in the SetYieldProcessorScalingFactor function if the value is valid. If this configuration is not specified, we default to 0 and fall back to the original logic.
This PR is port of #84339 as automatic merging failed.
Author:mrsharm
Assignees:mrsharm
Labels:
area-GC-coreclr
Milestone:-
@mrsharmmrsharm
added
the 
Servicing-consider
Issue for next servicing release review
label
Apr 7, 2023
@teo-tsirpanis
teo-tsirpanis
commented
Apr 7, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
@mrsharm you have to target the release/7.0-staging branch.
@teo-tsirpanisteo-tsirpanis
added this to the 7.0.x milestone
Apr 7, 2023
@JulieLeeMSFTJulieLeeMSFT
removed
the 
Servicing-consider
Issue for next servicing release review
label
Apr 7, 2023
@JulieLeeMSFT
JulieLeeMSFT
commented
Apr 7, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
@mrsharm, I am removing the servicing consider label until it is reviewed and all the tests are passed.
Maoni0
Maoni0
reviewed
Apr 7, 2023
View reviewed changes
Comment threadsrc/coreclr/gc/gc.cpp
Outdated

@mrsharm
mrsharm
changed the base branch from
release/7.0
to
release/7.0-stagingApril 8, 2023 01:14
@mrsharm
mrsharm
marked this pull request as ready for review
April 8, 2023 01:16
@carlossanlop
carlossanlop
commented
Apr 10, 2023•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
@mrsharm today is code complete. If you want this fix included in the May Servicing release, please get it ready by 4pm PT today:
  •  Get the Tactics approval ASAP (and once approved, please add the Servicing-approved label to unblock the check-service-labels CI action)
  •  Confirm the CI failures are unrelated
  •  Get a sign-off from another area owner
No OOB changes needed since this is a native code change.
@JulieLeeMSFT
JulieLeeMSFT
commented
Apr 10, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
cc @jeffschwMSFT for servicing consider.
@Maoni0
Maoni0
commented
Apr 10, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
both @mrsharm and @mangod9 are out of office and I was not informed this needed to be in for the next servicing release when we were going through issues last week. so I will assume this does not need to get in right now and let them handle it when they are back.
@JulieLeeMSFT
JulieLeeMSFT
commented
Apr 10, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
@mrsharm, please update the issue following the template for servicing fix (refer #84444).
@mangod9
mangod9
commented
Apr 11, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Correct, we are still waiting for customer validation on this and will merge when we have confirmation.
@mrsharmmrsharm
added
the 
Servicing-consider
Issue for next servicing release review
label
Apr 26, 2023
jeffschwMSFT
jeffschwMSFT
approved these changes
Apr 26, 2023
View reviewed changes
@jeffschwMSFTjeffschwMSFT
left a comment


Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

approved. we will bring for consideration in 7.0.x
@rbhandarbhanda
modified the milestones:
7.0.x, 7.0.7Apr 27, 2023
@rbhandarbhanda
added

Servicing-approved
Approved for servicing release
and removed

Servicing-consider
Issue for next servicing release review
labels
Apr 27, 2023
@mrsharm
mrsharm
merged commit 3a80b29
into
dotnet:release/7.0-stagingApr 27, 2023
@ghostghost
locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators
May 28, 2023
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.


Reviewers

@jeffschwMSFTjeffschwMSFTjeffschwMSFT approved these changes
@Maoni0Maoni0Maoni0 approved these changes
@cshungcshungAwaiting requested review from cshung
@eduardo-vpeduardo-vpAwaiting requested review from eduardo-vp
@mangod9mangod9Awaiting requested review from mangod9

Assignees

@mrsharmmrsharm

Labels

area-GC-coreclrServicing-approvedApproved for servicing release

Projects


None yet


Milestone

7.0.7

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

8 participants

@mrsharm@teo-tsirpanis@JulieLeeMSFT@carlossanlop@Maoni0@mangod9@jeffschwMSFT@rbhanda

, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
// Highlight search terms from Google/DuckDuckGo/Bing referrer
(function() {
var ref = document.referrer;
var terms = [];
if (ref.includes('google.com') || ref.includes('duckduckgo.com') || ref.includes('bing.com')) {
var url = new URL(ref);
var q = url.searchParams.get('q') || url.searchParams.get('p');
if (q) {
terms = q.split(/\s+/).filter(function(t) { return t.length > 2; });
}
}
if (terms.length === 0) return;
var style = document.createElement('style');
style.textContent = '.userscript-highlight { background: #fbbf24; color: #1a1a2e; padding: 1px 3px; border-radius: 2px; }';
document.head.appendChild(style);
function highlight(node) {
if (node.nodeType === 3) { // text node
var text = node.textContent;
var found = false;
terms.forEach(function(term) {
var regex = new RegExp('(' + term.replace(/[.*+?^${}()|[\]\\]/g, '\\') + ')', 'gi');
if (regex.test(text)) {
found = true;
var frag = document.createDocumentFragment();
var parts = text.split(regex);
parts.forEach(function(part, i) {
if (i % 2 === 0) {
frag.appendChild(document.createTextNode(part));
} else {
var span = document.createElement('span');
span.className = 'userscript-highlight';
span.textContent = part;
frag.appendChild(span);
}
});
node.parentNode.replaceChild(frag, node);
}
});
} else if (node.nodeType === 1 && node.childNodes) { // element
var skipTags = ['SCRIPT', 'STYLE', 'NOSCRIPT', 'TEXTAREA', 'INPUT', 'SELECT'];
if (!skipTags.includes(node.tagName)) {
Array.from(node.childNodes).forEach(highlight);
}
}
}
highlight(document.body);
// Re-highlight on dynamic content
var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {
mutations.forEach(function(m) {
m.addedNodes.forEach(function(node) {
if (node.nodeType === 1 || node.nodeType === 3) highlight(node);
});
});
});
observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Highlight Search Terms]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "*";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
Added the ability to specify a Spin Count Unit via a GC Configuration to release/7.0 by mrsharm · Pull Request #84495 · dotnet/runtime · GitHub
Skip to content
Added the ability to specify a Spin Count Unit via a GC Configuration to release/7.0 - #84495
Merged
mrsharm merged 2 commits into
dotnet:release/7.0-stagingfrom 
mrsharm:port_spincount
Apr 27, 2023
Merged
Added the ability to specify a Spin Count Unit via a GC Configuration to release/7.0#84495
mrsharm merged 2 commits into
dotnet:release/7.0-stagingfrom 
mrsharm:port_spincount
Conversation
@mrsharm
@mrsharmmrsharm
commented
Apr 7, 2023•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Added the ability to specify a Spin Count Unit via a GC Configuration for the release/7.0-staging branch and make use of this value in the SetYieldProcessorScalingFactor function if the value is valid. If this configuration is not specified, we default to 0 and fall back to the original logic.
This PR is port of #84339 as automatic merging failed.
Customer impact
There were performance regressions experienced by customers related to this fix that resulted in an increase in the Spin Count Unit. This PR allows the ability to hardcode that value.
Testing
Tested manually and verified by a customer that the fix reverted the regression.
Risk
Low. The setting is not enabled by default and has to be explicitly set by the user for the conditional logic to work.
@ghostghost
added
the 
area-GC-coreclr

label
Apr 7, 2023
@ghostghost
assigned mrsharmApr 7, 2023
@ghost
ghost
commented
Apr 7, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Tagging subscribers to this area: @dotnet/gc

See info in area-owners.md if you want to be subscribed.
Issue Details
Added the ability to specify a Spin Count Unit via a GC Configuration for the release/7.0 branch and make use of this value in the SetYieldProcessorScalingFactor function if the value is valid. If this configuration is not specified, we default to 0 and fall back to the original logic.
This PR is port of #84339 as automatic merging failed.
Author:mrsharm
Assignees:mrsharm
Labels:
area-GC-coreclr
Milestone:-
@mrsharmmrsharm
added
the 
Servicing-consider
Issue for next servicing release review
label
Apr 7, 2023
@teo-tsirpanis
teo-tsirpanis
commented
Apr 7, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
@mrsharm you have to target the release/7.0-staging branch.
@teo-tsirpanisteo-tsirpanis
added this to the 7.0.x milestone
Apr 7, 2023
@JulieLeeMSFTJulieLeeMSFT
removed
the 
Servicing-consider
Issue for next servicing release review
label
Apr 7, 2023
@JulieLeeMSFT
JulieLeeMSFT
commented
Apr 7, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
@mrsharm, I am removing the servicing consider label until it is reviewed and all the tests are passed.
Maoni0
Maoni0
reviewed
Apr 7, 2023
View reviewed changes
Comment threadsrc/coreclr/gc/gc.cpp
Outdated

@mrsharm
mrsharm
changed the base branch from
release/7.0
to
release/7.0-stagingApril 8, 2023 01:14
@mrsharm
mrsharm
marked this pull request as ready for review
April 8, 2023 01:16
@carlossanlop
carlossanlop
commented
Apr 10, 2023•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
@mrsharm today is code complete. If you want this fix included in the May Servicing release, please get it ready by 4pm PT today:
  •  Get the Tactics approval ASAP (and once approved, please add the Servicing-approved label to unblock the check-service-labels CI action)
  •  Confirm the CI failures are unrelated
  •  Get a sign-off from another area owner
No OOB changes needed since this is a native code change.
@JulieLeeMSFT
JulieLeeMSFT
commented
Apr 10, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
cc @jeffschwMSFT for servicing consider.
@Maoni0
Maoni0
commented
Apr 10, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
both @mrsharm and @mangod9 are out of office and I was not informed this needed to be in for the next servicing release when we were going through issues last week. so I will assume this does not need to get in right now and let them handle it when they are back.
@JulieLeeMSFT
JulieLeeMSFT
commented
Apr 10, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
@mrsharm, please update the issue following the template for servicing fix (refer #84444).
@mangod9
mangod9
commented
Apr 11, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Correct, we are still waiting for customer validation on this and will merge when we have confirmation.
@mrsharmmrsharm
added
the 
Servicing-consider
Issue for next servicing release review
label
Apr 26, 2023
jeffschwMSFT
jeffschwMSFT
approved these changes
Apr 26, 2023
View reviewed changes
@jeffschwMSFTjeffschwMSFT
left a comment


Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

approved. we will bring for consideration in 7.0.x
@rbhandarbhanda
modified the milestones:
7.0.x, 7.0.7Apr 27, 2023
@rbhandarbhanda
added

Servicing-approved
Approved for servicing release
and removed

Servicing-consider
Issue for next servicing release review
labels
Apr 27, 2023
@mrsharm
mrsharm
merged commit 3a80b29
into
dotnet:release/7.0-stagingApr 27, 2023
@ghostghost
locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators
May 28, 2023
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.


Reviewers

@jeffschwMSFTjeffschwMSFTjeffschwMSFT approved these changes
@Maoni0Maoni0Maoni0 approved these changes
@cshungcshungAwaiting requested review from cshung
@eduardo-vpeduardo-vpAwaiting requested review from eduardo-vp
@mangod9mangod9Awaiting requested review from mangod9

Assignees

@mrsharmmrsharm

Labels

area-GC-coreclrServicing-approvedApproved for servicing release

Projects


None yet


Milestone

7.0.7

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

8 participants

@mrsharm@teo-tsirpanis@JulieLeeMSFT@carlossanlop@Maoni0@mangod9@jeffschwMSFT@rbhanda

, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
// Strip utm_, fbclid, gclid, etc. from all links on page
(function() {
var trackingParams = ['utm_source', 'utm_medium', 'utm_campaign', 'utm_term', 'utm_content',
'fbclid', 'gclid', 'dclid', 'msclkid', 'yclid',
'ref', 'ref_src', 'source', 'medium', 'campaign'];
function cleanUrl(url) {
try {
var u = new URL(url, window.location.origin);
var changed = false;
trackingParams.forEach(function(p) {
if (u.searchParams.has(p)) {
u.searchParams.delete(p);
changed = true;
}
});
return changed ? u.toString() : url;
} catch (e) {
return url;
}
}
function cleanLinks() {
document.querySelectorAll('a[href]').forEach(function(a) {
var clean = cleanUrl(a.href);
if (clean !== a.href) a.href = clean;
});
}
cleanLinks();
var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {
mutations.forEach(function(m) {
m.addedNodes.forEach(function(node) {
if (node.nodeType === 1) {
if (node.tagName === 'A') cleanLinks();
node.querySelectorAll('a[href]').forEach(function(a) {
var clean = cleanUrl(a.href);
if (clean !== a.href) a.href = clean;
});
}
});
});
});
observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Remove Tracking Parameters from Links]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "youtube.com";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + "youtube\\.com" + '
Added the ability to specify a Spin Count Unit via a GC Configuration to release/7.0 by mrsharm · Pull Request #84495 · dotnet/runtime · GitHub
Skip to content
Added the ability to specify a Spin Count Unit via a GC Configuration to release/7.0 - #84495
Merged
mrsharm merged 2 commits into
dotnet:release/7.0-stagingfrom 
mrsharm:port_spincount
Apr 27, 2023
Merged
Added the ability to specify a Spin Count Unit via a GC Configuration to release/7.0#84495
mrsharm merged 2 commits into
dotnet:release/7.0-stagingfrom 
mrsharm:port_spincount
Conversation
@mrsharm
@mrsharmmrsharm
commented
Apr 7, 2023•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Added the ability to specify a Spin Count Unit via a GC Configuration for the release/7.0-staging branch and make use of this value in the SetYieldProcessorScalingFactor function if the value is valid. If this configuration is not specified, we default to 0 and fall back to the original logic.
This PR is port of #84339 as automatic merging failed.
Customer impact
There were performance regressions experienced by customers related to this fix that resulted in an increase in the Spin Count Unit. This PR allows the ability to hardcode that value.
Testing
Tested manually and verified by a customer that the fix reverted the regression.
Risk
Low. The setting is not enabled by default and has to be explicitly set by the user for the conditional logic to work.
@ghostghost
added
the 
area-GC-coreclr

label
Apr 7, 2023
@ghostghost
assigned mrsharmApr 7, 2023
@ghost
ghost
commented
Apr 7, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Tagging subscribers to this area: @dotnet/gc

See info in area-owners.md if you want to be subscribed.
Issue Details
Added the ability to specify a Spin Count Unit via a GC Configuration for the release/7.0 branch and make use of this value in the SetYieldProcessorScalingFactor function if the value is valid. If this configuration is not specified, we default to 0 and fall back to the original logic.
This PR is port of #84339 as automatic merging failed.
Author:mrsharm
Assignees:mrsharm
Labels:
area-GC-coreclr
Milestone:-
@mrsharmmrsharm
added
the 
Servicing-consider
Issue for next servicing release review
label
Apr 7, 2023
@teo-tsirpanis
teo-tsirpanis
commented
Apr 7, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
@mrsharm you have to target the release/7.0-staging branch.
@teo-tsirpanisteo-tsirpanis
added this to the 7.0.x milestone
Apr 7, 2023
@JulieLeeMSFTJulieLeeMSFT
removed
the 
Servicing-consider
Issue for next servicing release review
label
Apr 7, 2023
@JulieLeeMSFT
JulieLeeMSFT
commented
Apr 7, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
@mrsharm, I am removing the servicing consider label until it is reviewed and all the tests are passed.
Maoni0
Maoni0
reviewed
Apr 7, 2023
View reviewed changes
Comment threadsrc/coreclr/gc/gc.cpp
Outdated

@mrsharm
mrsharm
changed the base branch from
release/7.0
to
release/7.0-stagingApril 8, 2023 01:14
@mrsharm
mrsharm
marked this pull request as ready for review
April 8, 2023 01:16
@carlossanlop
carlossanlop
commented
Apr 10, 2023•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
@mrsharm today is code complete. If you want this fix included in the May Servicing release, please get it ready by 4pm PT today:
  •  Get the Tactics approval ASAP (and once approved, please add the Servicing-approved label to unblock the check-service-labels CI action)
  •  Confirm the CI failures are unrelated
  •  Get a sign-off from another area owner
No OOB changes needed since this is a native code change.
@JulieLeeMSFT
JulieLeeMSFT
commented
Apr 10, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
cc @jeffschwMSFT for servicing consider.
@Maoni0
Maoni0
commented
Apr 10, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
both @mrsharm and @mangod9 are out of office and I was not informed this needed to be in for the next servicing release when we were going through issues last week. so I will assume this does not need to get in right now and let them handle it when they are back.
@JulieLeeMSFT
JulieLeeMSFT
commented
Apr 10, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
@mrsharm, please update the issue following the template for servicing fix (refer #84444).
@mangod9
mangod9
commented
Apr 11, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Correct, we are still waiting for customer validation on this and will merge when we have confirmation.
@mrsharmmrsharm
added
the 
Servicing-consider
Issue for next servicing release review
label
Apr 26, 2023
jeffschwMSFT
jeffschwMSFT
approved these changes
Apr 26, 2023
View reviewed changes
@jeffschwMSFTjeffschwMSFT
left a comment


Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

approved. we will bring for consideration in 7.0.x
@rbhandarbhanda
modified the milestones:
7.0.x, 7.0.7Apr 27, 2023
@rbhandarbhanda
added

Servicing-approved
Approved for servicing release
and removed

Servicing-consider
Issue for next servicing release review
labels
Apr 27, 2023
@mrsharm
mrsharm
merged commit 3a80b29
into
dotnet:release/7.0-stagingApr 27, 2023
@ghostghost
locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators
May 28, 2023
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.


Reviewers

@jeffschwMSFTjeffschwMSFTjeffschwMSFT approved these changes
@Maoni0Maoni0Maoni0 approved these changes
@cshungcshungAwaiting requested review from cshung
@eduardo-vpeduardo-vpAwaiting requested review from eduardo-vp
@mangod9mangod9Awaiting requested review from mangod9

Assignees

@mrsharmmrsharm

Labels

area-GC-coreclrServicing-approvedApproved for servicing release

Projects


None yet


Milestone

7.0.7

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

8 participants

@mrsharm@teo-tsirpanis@JulieLeeMSFT@carlossanlop@Maoni0@mangod9@jeffschwMSFT@rbhanda

, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
// Auto-enable theater mode on YouTube
(function() {
function tryTheater() {
var btn = document.querySelector('button[aria-label="Theater mode"], ytd-player #player button[title="Theater mode"]');
if (btn && !btn.classList.contains('activated')) {
btn.click();
}
}
// Try immediately
tryTheater();
// Try after navigation (SPA)
var lastUrl = location.href;
setInterval(function() {
if (location.href !== lastUrl) {
lastUrl = location.href;
setTimeout(tryTheater, 500);
}
}, 1000);
// Also try on player load
var observer = new MutationObserver(tryTheater);
observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:YouTube Theater Mode Default]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "*";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
Added the ability to specify a Spin Count Unit via a GC Configuration to release/7.0 by mrsharm · Pull Request #84495 · dotnet/runtime · GitHub
Skip to content
Added the ability to specify a Spin Count Unit via a GC Configuration to release/7.0 - #84495
Merged
mrsharm merged 2 commits into
dotnet:release/7.0-stagingfrom 
mrsharm:port_spincount
Apr 27, 2023
Merged
Added the ability to specify a Spin Count Unit via a GC Configuration to release/7.0#84495
mrsharm merged 2 commits into
dotnet:release/7.0-stagingfrom 
mrsharm:port_spincount
Conversation
@mrsharm
@mrsharmmrsharm
commented
Apr 7, 2023•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Added the ability to specify a Spin Count Unit via a GC Configuration for the release/7.0-staging branch and make use of this value in the SetYieldProcessorScalingFactor function if the value is valid. If this configuration is not specified, we default to 0 and fall back to the original logic.
This PR is port of #84339 as automatic merging failed.
Customer impact
There were performance regressions experienced by customers related to this fix that resulted in an increase in the Spin Count Unit. This PR allows the ability to hardcode that value.
Testing
Tested manually and verified by a customer that the fix reverted the regression.
Risk
Low. The setting is not enabled by default and has to be explicitly set by the user for the conditional logic to work.
@ghostghost
added
the 
area-GC-coreclr

label
Apr 7, 2023
@ghostghost
assigned mrsharmApr 7, 2023
@ghost
ghost
commented
Apr 7, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Tagging subscribers to this area: @dotnet/gc

See info in area-owners.md if you want to be subscribed.
Issue Details
Added the ability to specify a Spin Count Unit via a GC Configuration for the release/7.0 branch and make use of this value in the SetYieldProcessorScalingFactor function if the value is valid. If this configuration is not specified, we default to 0 and fall back to the original logic.
This PR is port of #84339 as automatic merging failed.
Author:mrsharm
Assignees:mrsharm
Labels:
area-GC-coreclr
Milestone:-
@mrsharmmrsharm
added
the 
Servicing-consider
Issue for next servicing release review
label
Apr 7, 2023
@teo-tsirpanis
teo-tsirpanis
commented
Apr 7, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
@mrsharm you have to target the release/7.0-staging branch.
@teo-tsirpanisteo-tsirpanis
added this to the 7.0.x milestone
Apr 7, 2023
@JulieLeeMSFTJulieLeeMSFT
removed
the 
Servicing-consider
Issue for next servicing release review
label
Apr 7, 2023
@JulieLeeMSFT
JulieLeeMSFT
commented
Apr 7, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
@mrsharm, I am removing the servicing consider label until it is reviewed and all the tests are passed.
Maoni0
Maoni0
reviewed
Apr 7, 2023
View reviewed changes
Comment threadsrc/coreclr/gc/gc.cpp
Outdated

@mrsharm
mrsharm
changed the base branch from
release/7.0
to
release/7.0-stagingApril 8, 2023 01:14
@mrsharm
mrsharm
marked this pull request as ready for review
April 8, 2023 01:16
@carlossanlop
carlossanlop
commented
Apr 10, 2023•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
@mrsharm today is code complete. If you want this fix included in the May Servicing release, please get it ready by 4pm PT today:
  •  Get the Tactics approval ASAP (and once approved, please add the Servicing-approved label to unblock the check-service-labels CI action)
  •  Confirm the CI failures are unrelated
  •  Get a sign-off from another area owner
No OOB changes needed since this is a native code change.
@JulieLeeMSFT
JulieLeeMSFT
commented
Apr 10, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
cc @jeffschwMSFT for servicing consider.
@Maoni0
Maoni0
commented
Apr 10, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
both @mrsharm and @mangod9 are out of office and I was not informed this needed to be in for the next servicing release when we were going through issues last week. so I will assume this does not need to get in right now and let them handle it when they are back.
@JulieLeeMSFT
JulieLeeMSFT
commented
Apr 10, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
@mrsharm, please update the issue following the template for servicing fix (refer #84444).
@mangod9
mangod9
commented
Apr 11, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Correct, we are still waiting for customer validation on this and will merge when we have confirmation.
@mrsharmmrsharm
added
the 
Servicing-consider
Issue for next servicing release review
label
Apr 26, 2023
jeffschwMSFT
jeffschwMSFT
approved these changes
Apr 26, 2023
View reviewed changes
@jeffschwMSFTjeffschwMSFT
left a comment


Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

approved. we will bring for consideration in 7.0.x
@rbhandarbhanda
modified the milestones:
7.0.x, 7.0.7Apr 27, 2023
@rbhandarbhanda
added

Servicing-approved
Approved for servicing release
and removed

Servicing-consider
Issue for next servicing release review
labels
Apr 27, 2023
@mrsharm
mrsharm
merged commit 3a80b29
into
dotnet:release/7.0-stagingApr 27, 2023
@ghostghost
locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators
May 28, 2023
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.


Reviewers

@jeffschwMSFTjeffschwMSFTjeffschwMSFT approved these changes
@Maoni0Maoni0Maoni0 approved these changes
@cshungcshungAwaiting requested review from cshung
@eduardo-vpeduardo-vpAwaiting requested review from eduardo-vp
@mangod9mangod9Awaiting requested review from mangod9

Assignees

@mrsharmmrsharm

Labels

area-GC-coreclrServicing-approvedApproved for servicing release

Projects


None yet


Milestone

7.0.7

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

8 participants

@mrsharm@teo-tsirpanis@JulieLeeMSFT@carlossanlop@Maoni0@mangod9@jeffschwMSFT@rbhanda

, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
// Remove or un-stick sticky/fixed headers that block content
(function() {
function unstick() {
document.querySelectorAll('header, nav, [role="banner"], .header, .navbar, .sticky, .fixed-top, [style*="position: fixed"], [style*="position:sticky"]').forEach(function(el) {
if (el.style.position === 'fixed' || el.style.position === 'sticky' || getComputedStyle(el).position === 'fixed' || getComputedStyle(el).position === 'sticky') {
el.style.position = 'static';
el.style.top = 'auto';
el.style.zIndex = 'auto';
}
});
}
unstick();
var observer = new MutationObserver(unstick);
observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true, attributes: true, attributeFilter: ['style', 'class'] });
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Kill Sticky Headers]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "*";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
Added the ability to specify a Spin Count Unit via a GC Configuration to release/7.0 by mrsharm · Pull Request #84495 · dotnet/runtime · GitHub
Skip to content
Added the ability to specify a Spin Count Unit via a GC Configuration to release/7.0 - #84495
Merged
mrsharm merged 2 commits into
dotnet:release/7.0-stagingfrom 
mrsharm:port_spincount
Apr 27, 2023
Merged
Added the ability to specify a Spin Count Unit via a GC Configuration to release/7.0#84495
mrsharm merged 2 commits into
dotnet:release/7.0-stagingfrom 
mrsharm:port_spincount
Conversation
@mrsharm
@mrsharmmrsharm
commented
Apr 7, 2023•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Added the ability to specify a Spin Count Unit via a GC Configuration for the release/7.0-staging branch and make use of this value in the SetYieldProcessorScalingFactor function if the value is valid. If this configuration is not specified, we default to 0 and fall back to the original logic.
This PR is port of #84339 as automatic merging failed.
Customer impact
There were performance regressions experienced by customers related to this fix that resulted in an increase in the Spin Count Unit. This PR allows the ability to hardcode that value.
Testing
Tested manually and verified by a customer that the fix reverted the regression.
Risk
Low. The setting is not enabled by default and has to be explicitly set by the user for the conditional logic to work.
@ghostghost
added
the 
area-GC-coreclr

label
Apr 7, 2023
@ghostghost
assigned mrsharmApr 7, 2023
@ghost
ghost
commented
Apr 7, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Tagging subscribers to this area: @dotnet/gc

See info in area-owners.md if you want to be subscribed.
Issue Details
Added the ability to specify a Spin Count Unit via a GC Configuration for the release/7.0 branch and make use of this value in the SetYieldProcessorScalingFactor function if the value is valid. If this configuration is not specified, we default to 0 and fall back to the original logic.
This PR is port of #84339 as automatic merging failed.
Author:mrsharm
Assignees:mrsharm
Labels:
area-GC-coreclr
Milestone:-
@mrsharmmrsharm
added
the 
Servicing-consider
Issue for next servicing release review
label
Apr 7, 2023
@teo-tsirpanis
teo-tsirpanis
commented
Apr 7, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
@mrsharm you have to target the release/7.0-staging branch.
@teo-tsirpanisteo-tsirpanis
added this to the 7.0.x milestone
Apr 7, 2023
@JulieLeeMSFTJulieLeeMSFT
removed
the 
Servicing-consider
Issue for next servicing release review
label
Apr 7, 2023
@JulieLeeMSFT
JulieLeeMSFT
commented
Apr 7, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
@mrsharm, I am removing the servicing consider label until it is reviewed and all the tests are passed.
Maoni0
Maoni0
reviewed
Apr 7, 2023
View reviewed changes
Comment threadsrc/coreclr/gc/gc.cpp
Outdated

@mrsharm
mrsharm
changed the base branch from
release/7.0
to
release/7.0-stagingApril 8, 2023 01:14
@mrsharm
mrsharm
marked this pull request as ready for review
April 8, 2023 01:16
@carlossanlop
carlossanlop
commented
Apr 10, 2023•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
@mrsharm today is code complete. If you want this fix included in the May Servicing release, please get it ready by 4pm PT today:
  •  Get the Tactics approval ASAP (and once approved, please add the Servicing-approved label to unblock the check-service-labels CI action)
  •  Confirm the CI failures are unrelated
  •  Get a sign-off from another area owner
No OOB changes needed since this is a native code change.
@JulieLeeMSFT
JulieLeeMSFT
commented
Apr 10, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
cc @jeffschwMSFT for servicing consider.
@Maoni0
Maoni0
commented
Apr 10, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
both @mrsharm and @mangod9 are out of office and I was not informed this needed to be in for the next servicing release when we were going through issues last week. so I will assume this does not need to get in right now and let them handle it when they are back.
@JulieLeeMSFT
JulieLeeMSFT
commented
Apr 10, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
@mrsharm, please update the issue following the template for servicing fix (refer #84444).
@mangod9
mangod9
commented
Apr 11, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Correct, we are still waiting for customer validation on this and will merge when we have confirmation.
@mrsharmmrsharm
added
the 
Servicing-consider
Issue for next servicing release review
label
Apr 26, 2023
jeffschwMSFT
jeffschwMSFT
approved these changes
Apr 26, 2023
View reviewed changes
@jeffschwMSFTjeffschwMSFT
left a comment


Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

approved. we will bring for consideration in 7.0.x
@rbhandarbhanda
modified the milestones:
7.0.x, 7.0.7Apr 27, 2023
@rbhandarbhanda
added

Servicing-approved
Approved for servicing release
and removed

Servicing-consider
Issue for next servicing release review
labels
Apr 27, 2023
@mrsharm
mrsharm
merged commit 3a80b29
into
dotnet:release/7.0-stagingApr 27, 2023
@ghostghost
locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators
May 28, 2023
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.


Reviewers

@jeffschwMSFTjeffschwMSFTjeffschwMSFT approved these changes
@Maoni0Maoni0Maoni0 approved these changes
@cshungcshungAwaiting requested review from cshung
@eduardo-vpeduardo-vpAwaiting requested review from eduardo-vp
@mangod9mangod9Awaiting requested review from mangod9

Assignees

@mrsharmmrsharm

Labels

area-GC-coreclrServicing-approvedApproved for servicing release

Projects


None yet


Milestone

7.0.7

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

8 participants

@mrsharm@teo-tsirpanis@JulieLeeMSFT@carlossanlop@Maoni0@mangod9@jeffschwMSFT@rbhanda

, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
// Universal Dark Mode - works on any site
(function() {
var enabled = true;
function applyDarkMode() {
if (!enabled) return;
// Create style element if it doesn't exist
var style = document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style');
if (!style) {
style = document.createElement('style');
style.id = 'universal-dark-mode-style';
document.head.appendChild(style);
}
// Dark mode CSS - inverts colors but preserves images/video
style.textContent = '
/* Invert everything except media */
html {
filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important;
background: #1a1a2e !important;
}
/* Restore images, videos, iframes, canvas */
img, video, iframe, canvas, svg, picture, [style*="background-image"] {
filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important;
}
/* Preserve specific elements that should not be inverted */
.no-dark-mode, .no-dark-mode *,
[data-theme="light"], [data-theme="light"],
.ace_editor, .ace_editor *,
.CodeMirror, .CodeMirror *,
.monaco-editor, .monaco-editor *,
.markdown-body pre, .markdown-body pre *,
.highlight, .highlight *,
pre code, pre code * {
filter: none !important;
}
/* Fix common UI elements */
.modal, .popup, .dropdown-menu, .tooltip, .popover {
filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important;
background: #2d2d44 !important;
border-color: #444 !important;
}
/* Scrollbars */
::-webkit-scrollbar { background: #1a1a2e !important; }
::-webkit-scrollbar-thumb { background: #444 !important; }
::-webkit-scrollbar-thumb:hover { background: #555 !important; }
/* Selection */
::selection { background: #4ecdc4 !important; color: #1a1a2e !important; }
::-moz-selection { background: #4ecdc4 !important; color: #1a1a2e !important; }
';
}
function removeDarkMode() {
var style = document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style');
if (style) style.remove();
}
// Toggle with Alt+Shift+D
document.addEventListener('keydown', function(e) {
if (e.altKey && e.shiftKey && e.key === 'D') {
e.preventDefault();
enabled = !enabled;
if (enabled) {
applyDarkMode();
console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Enabled');
} else {
removeDarkMode();
console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Disabled');
}
}
});
// Apply on load
applyDarkMode();
// Re-apply on dynamic content
var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {
if (enabled && !document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style')) {
applyDarkMode();
}
});
observer.observe(document.head, { childList: true });
console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Loaded - Press Alt+Shift+D to toggle');
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Universal Dark Mode]', __e); }
})();
})();
Added the ability to specify a Spin Count Unit via a GC Configuration to release/7.0 by mrsharm · Pull Request #84495 · dotnet/runtime · GitHub
Skip to content
Added the ability to specify a Spin Count Unit via a GC Configuration to release/7.0 - #84495
Merged
mrsharm merged 2 commits into
dotnet:release/7.0-stagingfrom 
mrsharm:port_spincount
Apr 27, 2023
Merged
Added the ability to specify a Spin Count Unit via a GC Configuration to release/7.0#84495
mrsharm merged 2 commits into
dotnet:release/7.0-stagingfrom 
mrsharm:port_spincount
Conversation
@mrsharm
@mrsharmmrsharm
commented
Apr 7, 2023•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Added the ability to specify a Spin Count Unit via a GC Configuration for the release/7.0-staging branch and make use of this value in the SetYieldProcessorScalingFactor function if the value is valid. If this configuration is not specified, we default to 0 and fall back to the original logic.
This PR is port of #84339 as automatic merging failed.
Customer impact
There were performance regressions experienced by customers related to this fix that resulted in an increase in the Spin Count Unit. This PR allows the ability to hardcode that value.
Testing
Tested manually and verified by a customer that the fix reverted the regression.
Risk
Low. The setting is not enabled by default and has to be explicitly set by the user for the conditional logic to work.
@ghostghost
added
the 
area-GC-coreclr

label
Apr 7, 2023
@ghostghost
assigned mrsharmApr 7, 2023
@ghost
ghost
commented
Apr 7, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Tagging subscribers to this area: @dotnet/gc

See info in area-owners.md if you want to be subscribed.
Issue Details
Added the ability to specify a Spin Count Unit via a GC Configuration for the release/7.0 branch and make use of this value in the SetYieldProcessorScalingFactor function if the value is valid. If this configuration is not specified, we default to 0 and fall back to the original logic.
This PR is port of #84339 as automatic merging failed.
Author:mrsharm
Assignees:mrsharm
Labels:
area-GC-coreclr
Milestone:-
@mrsharmmrsharm
added
the 
Servicing-consider
Issue for next servicing release review
label
Apr 7, 2023
@teo-tsirpanis
teo-tsirpanis
commented
Apr 7, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
@mrsharm you have to target the release/7.0-staging branch.
@teo-tsirpanisteo-tsirpanis
added this to the 7.0.x milestone
Apr 7, 2023
@JulieLeeMSFTJulieLeeMSFT
removed
the 
Servicing-consider
Issue for next servicing release review
label
Apr 7, 2023
@JulieLeeMSFT
JulieLeeMSFT
commented
Apr 7, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
@mrsharm, I am removing the servicing consider label until it is reviewed and all the tests are passed.
Maoni0
Maoni0
reviewed
Apr 7, 2023
View reviewed changes
Comment threadsrc/coreclr/gc/gc.cpp
Outdated

@mrsharm
mrsharm
changed the base branch from
release/7.0
to
release/7.0-stagingApril 8, 2023 01:14
@mrsharm
mrsharm
marked this pull request as ready for review
April 8, 2023 01:16
@carlossanlop
carlossanlop
commented
Apr 10, 2023•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
@mrsharm today is code complete. If you want this fix included in the May Servicing release, please get it ready by 4pm PT today:
  •  Get the Tactics approval ASAP (and once approved, please add the Servicing-approved label to unblock the check-service-labels CI action)
  •  Confirm the CI failures are unrelated
  •  Get a sign-off from another area owner
No OOB changes needed since this is a native code change.
@JulieLeeMSFT
JulieLeeMSFT
commented
Apr 10, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
cc @jeffschwMSFT for servicing consider.
@Maoni0
Maoni0
commented
Apr 10, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
both @mrsharm and @mangod9 are out of office and I was not informed this needed to be in for the next servicing release when we were going through issues last week. so I will assume this does not need to get in right now and let them handle it when they are back.
@JulieLeeMSFT
JulieLeeMSFT
commented
Apr 10, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
@mrsharm, please update the issue following the template for servicing fix (refer #84444).
@mangod9
mangod9
commented
Apr 11, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Correct, we are still waiting for customer validation on this and will merge when we have confirmation.
@mrsharmmrsharm
added
the 
Servicing-consider
Issue for next servicing release review
label
Apr 26, 2023
jeffschwMSFT
jeffschwMSFT
approved these changes
Apr 26, 2023
View reviewed changes
@jeffschwMSFTjeffschwMSFT
left a comment


Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

approved. we will bring for consideration in 7.0.x
@rbhandarbhanda
modified the milestones:
7.0.x, 7.0.7Apr 27, 2023
@rbhandarbhanda
added

Servicing-approved
Approved for servicing release
and removed

Servicing-consider
Issue for next servicing release review
labels
Apr 27, 2023
@mrsharm
mrsharm
merged commit 3a80b29
into
dotnet:release/7.0-stagingApr 27, 2023
@ghostghost
locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators
May 28, 2023
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.


Reviewers

@jeffschwMSFTjeffschwMSFTjeffschwMSFT approved these changes
@Maoni0Maoni0Maoni0 approved these changes
@cshungcshungAwaiting requested review from cshung
@eduardo-vpeduardo-vpAwaiting requested review from eduardo-vp
@mangod9mangod9Awaiting requested review from mangod9

Assignees

@mrsharmmrsharm

Labels

area-GC-coreclrServicing-approvedApproved for servicing release

Projects


None yet


Milestone

7.0.7

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

8 participants

@mrsharm@teo-tsirpanis@JulieLeeMSFT@carlossanlop@Maoni0@mangod9@jeffschwMSFT@rbhanda