On Wed, 29 Nov 2023 23:06:10 GMT, Daniel D. Daugherty
wrote:
> A belated thumbs up. Sorry I didn't get back to this review before the fix
> was integrated.
Still thanks for reviewing the change, @dcubed-ojdk.
>
> I found just a nit comment that could be more clear.
The particular issue occu
On Wed, 22 Nov 2023 22:40:20 GMT, Jiangli Zhou wrote:
>> Please review JvmtiThreadState::state_for_while_locked change to handle the
>> state->get_thread_oop() null case. Please see
>> https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8319935 for details.
>
> Jiangli Zhou has updated the pull request increme
On Tue, 28 Nov 2023 21:28:31 GMT, Jiangli Zhou wrote:
>> This fix looks good to me, so approved now.
>> I assume it is for 22. Is it correct?
>
>> This fix looks good to me, so approved now. I assume it is for 22. Is it
>> correct?
>
> Thanks for the careful review, @sspitsyn! The fix is for 22
On Wed, 22 Nov 2023 22:40:20 GMT, Jiangli Zhou wrote:
>> Please review JvmtiThreadState::state_for_while_locked change to handle the
>> state->get_thread_oop() null case. Please see
>> https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8319935 for details.
>
> Jiangli Zhou has updated the pull request increme
On Tue, 28 Nov 2023 20:38:55 GMT, Serguei Spitsyn wrote:
>> @sspitsyn For the above suggestions, it seems cleaner/safer to handle the
>> clean-ups in a separate RFE with full testing including the vthread cases.
>> There are additional comments in
>> https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/16642#i
On Tue, 28 Nov 2023 20:43:15 GMT, Serguei Spitsyn wrote:
> This fix looks good to me, so approved now. I assume it is for 22. Is it
> correct?
Thanks for the careful review, @sspitsyn! The fix is for 22. We probably should
also consider back-porting to JDK 11 to prevent any potential changes i
On Wed, 22 Nov 2023 22:40:20 GMT, Jiangli Zhou wrote:
>> Please review JvmtiThreadState::state_for_while_locked change to handle the
>> state->get_thread_oop() null case. Please see
>> https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8319935 for details.
>
> Jiangli Zhou has updated the pull request increme
On Tue, 28 Nov 2023 18:36:00 GMT, Jiangli Zhou wrote:
>> This also was caught by my eyes. :)
>> With the lines 99-101 in place the only case when `thread_oop` can be equal
>> to `nullptr` is when `thread->threadObj() == nullptr`. My understanding is
>> that it can be for a detached thread only.
On Wed, 22 Nov 2023 22:40:20 GMT, Jiangli Zhou wrote:
>> Please review JvmtiThreadState::state_for_while_locked change to handle the
>> state->get_thread_oop() null case. Please see
>> https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8319935 for details.
>
> Jiangli Zhou has updated the pull request increme
On Tue, 28 Nov 2023 05:08:58 GMT, Serguei Spitsyn wrote:
>> src/hotspot/share/prims/jvmtiThreadState.inline.hpp line 98:
>>
>>> 96:state->get_thread_oop() != thread_oop)) {
>>> 97: // Check if java_lang_Thread already has a link to the
>>> JvmtiThreadState.
>>> 9
On Mon, 13 Nov 2023 23:33:50 GMT, Man Cao wrote:
>> Jiangli Zhou has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Address Serguei Spitsyn's comments/suggestions:
>> - Remove the redundant thread->is_Java_thread() check from
>> JvmtiSam
11 matches
Mail list logo
