Re: synchronization of JVMTI phase notifications [Fwd: Data visibility between threads in Hotspot]

2009-02-13 Thread Swamy Venkataramanappa
jvmti spec says no events should be generated after the VM_DEATH. http://java.sun.com/javase/6/docs/platform/jvmti/jvmti.html#VMDeath It says: "No event will occur of after this event". I suspect we are posting vm death event too soon. I think we should post vm death after vm thread is destro

Re: synchronization of JVMTI phase notifications [Fwd: Data visibility between threads in Hotspot]

2009-02-13 Thread Paul Hohensee
If that's true, then you do indeed need a mutex. The OrderAccess methods only guarantee visibility ordering. They don't guarantee exclusive access to shared variables. Paul Hiroshi Yamauchi wrote: Dan, On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at 11:39 AM, Daniel D. Daugherty wrote: I'm leaning toward ma

Re: synchronization of JVMTI phase notifications [Fwd: Data visibility between threads in Hotspot]

2009-02-13 Thread Hiroshi Yamauchi
They looks related but it's hard for me to tell because I cannot see the test cases :) On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at 2:13 PM, Daniel D. Daugherty wrote: > Hiroshi, > > I found a couple of good candidates: > > 6357005 4/3 'SingleStep' event fails assertion in > 'src/share/vm/prims/jvmtiE

Re: synchronization of JVMTI phase notifications [Fwd: Data visibility between threads in Hotspot]

2009-02-13 Thread Hiroshi Yamauchi
Dan, On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at 11:39 AM, Daniel D. Daugherty wrote: > I'm leaning toward making the two fields volatile and adding the > appropriate OrderAccess::XXX calls. I vaguely remember an existing > bug for events posting late. I'm going to see if I can find it. Making the fields volatile

Re: synchronization of JVMTI phase notifications [Fwd: Data visibility between threads in Hotspot]

2009-02-13 Thread Daniel D. Daugherty
Hiroshi, I found a couple of good candidates: 6357005 4/3 'SingleStep' event fails assertion in 'src/share/vm/prims/jvmtiEventController.cpp, 590' 6648438 4/4 src/share/vm/prims/jvmtiEnv.cpp:457 assert(phase == JVMTI_PHASE_LIVE,"sanity check") I suspect that

Re: synchronization of JVMTI phase notifications [Fwd: Data visibility between threads in Hotspot]

2009-02-13 Thread Daniel D. Daugherty
Hiroshi, I'm leaning toward making the two fields volatile and adding the appropriate OrderAccess::XXX calls. I vaguely remember an existing bug for events posting late. I'm going to see if I can find it. Dan Hiroshi Yamauchi wrote: Hi Dan, On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 12:43 PM, Daniel D. Daugher

Re: synchronization of JVMTI phase notifications [Fwd: Data visibility between threads in Hotspot]

2009-02-13 Thread Hiroshi Yamauchi
Hi Dan, On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 12:43 PM, Daniel D. Daugherty < daniel.daughe...@sun.com> wrote: > I'll chime in on parts of this thread below. > > > > Tim Bell wrote: > >> I don't know the precise answer to this question, so I am forwarding it to >> the Serviceability list to get a wider audienc

hg: jdk7/tl/langtools: 6769027: Source line should be displayed immediately after the first diagnostic line

2009-02-13 Thread maurizio . cimadamore
Changeset: 6ada6122dd4f Author:mcimadamore Date: 2009-02-13 11:57 + URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk7/tl/langtools/rev/6ada6122dd4f 6769027: Source line should be displayed immediately after the first diagnostic line Summary: Added support for customizing diagnostic output v