On Wed, 15 May 2024 20:29:17 GMT, Serguei Spitsyn wrote:
>> The fix is to degrade virtual threads support in the JVM TI
>> `GetObjectMonitorUsage` function so that it is specified to only return an
>> owner when the owner is a platform thread. Also, virtual threads are not
>> listed in the
On Wed, 15 May 2024 20:29:17 GMT, Serguei Spitsyn wrote:
>> The fix is to degrade virtual threads support in the JVM TI
>> `GetObjectMonitorUsage` function so that it is specified to only return an
>> owner when the owner is a platform thread. Also, virtual threads are not
>> listed in the
On Wed, 15 May 2024 20:29:17 GMT, Serguei Spitsyn wrote:
>> The fix is to degrade virtual threads support in the JVM TI
>> `GetObjectMonitorUsage` function so that it is specified to only return an
>> owner when the owner is a platform thread. Also, virtual threads are not
>> listed in the
On Wed, 15 May 2024 20:29:17 GMT, Serguei Spitsyn wrote:
>> The fix is to degrade virtual threads support in the JVM TI
>> `GetObjectMonitorUsage` function so that it is specified to only return an
>> owner when the owner is a platform thread. Also, virtual threads are not
>> listed in the
On Wed, 15 May 2024 20:09:52 GMT, Serguei Spitsyn wrote:
>> src/hotspot/share/prims/jvmtiEnvBase.cpp line 1535:
>>
>>> 1533: bool is_virtual =
>>> java_lang_VirtualThread::is_instance(thread_oop);
>>> 1534: if (is_virtual) {
>>> 1535: skipped++;
>>
>> Do we really need to
> The fix is to degrade virtual threads support in the JVM TI
> `GetObjectMonitorUsage` function so that it is specified to only return an
> owner when the owner is a platform thread. Also, virtual threads are not
> listed in the both `waiters` and `notify_waiters` lists returned in the
>
> The fix is to degrade virtual threads support in the JVM TI
> `GetObjectMonitorUsage` function so that it is specified to only return an
> owner when the owner is a platform thread. Also, virtual threads are not
> listed in the both `waiters` and `notify_waiters` lists returned in the
>
On Wed, 15 May 2024 19:52:36 GMT, Chris Plummer wrote:
>> Serguei Spitsyn has updated the pull request incrementally with one
>> additional commit since the last revision:
>>
>> review: 1. clarifications in JDWP and JDI spec; 2. clarifications in test
>> comments.
>
>
On Wed, 15 May 2024 19:51:51 GMT, Chris Plummer wrote:
>> Serguei Spitsyn has updated the pull request incrementally with one
>> additional commit since the last revision:
>>
>> review: 1. clarifications in JDWP and JDI spec; 2. clarifications in test
>> comments.
>
>
> The fix is to degrade virtual threads support in the JVM TI
> `GetObjectMonitorUsage` function so that it is specified to only return an
> owner when the owner is a platform thread. Also, virtual threads are not
> listed in the both `waiters` and `notify_waiters` lists returned in the
>
On Tue, 14 May 2024 23:56:14 GMT, Serguei Spitsyn wrote:
>> The fix is to degrade virtual threads support in the JVM TI
>> `GetObjectMonitorUsage` function so that it is specified to only return an
>> owner when the owner is a platform thread. Also, virtual threads are not
>> listed in the
On Wed, 1 May 2024 20:49:02 GMT, Chris Plummer wrote:
>> Serguei Spitsyn has updated the pull request incrementally with one
>> additional commit since the last revision:
>>
>> review: 1. clarifications in JDWP and JDI spec; 2. clarifications in test
>> comments.
>
>
On Tue, 14 May 2024 23:19:14 GMT, Serguei Spitsyn wrote:
>> Okay, please, let me explain this one more time.
>> The original comments before method `check()` calls describe the testing
>> scenario (or configuration setup before the verifying check) but not the
>> numbers expected to be
> The fix is to degrade virtual threads support in the JVM TI
> `GetObjectMonitorUsage` function so that it is specified to only return an
> owner when the owner is a platform thread. Also, virtual threads are not
> listed in the both `waiters` and `notify_waiters` lists returned in the
>
On Wed, 1 May 2024 20:45:58 GMT, Chris Plummer wrote:
>> Serguei Spitsyn has updated the pull request incrementally with one
>> additional commit since the last revision:
>>
>> review: tweaks in JVMTI and JDWP changes
>
> src/jdk.jdi/share/classes/com/sun/jdi/ObjectReference.java line 348:
>
On Thu, 2 May 2024 21:50:26 GMT, Chris Plummer wrote:
>> src/java.se/share/data/jdwp/jdwp.spec line 1622:
>>
>>> 1620: (threadObject owner "The platform thread owning this
>>> monitor, or nullptr "
>>> 1621: "if owned` by a virtual thread or not
>>>
On Tue, 14 May 2024 23:13:28 GMT, Serguei Spitsyn wrote:
>> I don't understand the issue with the updated commented. It is precisely
>> telling you what the expected "count" values should be. If you leave the
>> macros in the comment, then the comment is wrong for virtual threads. If you
>>
On Tue, 14 May 2024 17:51:03 GMT, Chris Plummer wrote:
>>> expEnteringCount/expWaitingCount contain the tested patterns.
>>
>> I kind of disagree.
>> Please, take look at the loop below:
>>
>> for (int i = 0; i < NUMBER_OF_WAITING_THREADS; i++) {
>> expEnteringCount
On Fri, 3 May 2024 10:42:45 GMT, Serguei Spitsyn wrote:
>> ...and there are also comments above with this issue.
>
>> expEnteringCount/expWaitingCount contain the tested patterns.
>
> I kind of disagree.
> Please, take look at the loop below:
>
> for (int i = 0; i <
> The fix is to degrade virtual threads support in the JVM TI
> `GetObjectMonitorUsage` function so that it is specified to only return an
> owner when the owner is a platform thread. Also, virtual threads are not
> listed in the both `waiters` and `notify_waiters` lists returned in the
>
On Thu, 2 May 2024 21:47:50 GMT, Chris Plummer wrote:
>> expEnteringCount/expWaitingCount contain the tested patterns. I don't see
>> why they can't just replace
>> NUMBER_OF_ENTERING_THREADS/NUMBER_OF_WAITING_THREADS in the comments also.
>> In fact it is confusing if you don't because code
On Fri, 3 May 2024 06:40:07 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
>> src/hotspot/share/prims/jvmti.xml line 8280:
>>
>>> 8278:
>>> 8279: The number of platform threads waiting to own this
>>> monitor, or 0
>>> 8280: if only virtual threads are waiting or no threads are
On Thu, 2 May 2024 21:44:43 GMT, Chris Plummer wrote:
>> Serguei Spitsyn has updated the pull request incrementally with one
>> additional commit since the last revision:
>>
>> review: Corrections in: 1) JVMTI/JDWP spec; 2) test vthread checks; 3)
>> test comments
>
>
On Thu, 2 May 2024 21:36:27 GMT, Chris Plummer wrote:
>> Thank you for the comment. In fact, I don't know how to fix it.
>> Replacing of NUMBER_OF_ENTERING_THREADS/NUMBER_OF_WAITING_THREADS in
>> comments with `expEnteringCount/expWaitingCount` does not make sense to me.
>> The comments are
On Thu, 2 May 2024 07:33:09 GMT, Serguei Spitsyn wrote:
>> The fix is to degrade virtual threads support in the JVM TI
>> `GetObjectMonitorUsage` function so that it is specified to only return an
>> owner when the owner is a platform thread. Also, virtual threads are not
>> listed in the
On Wed, 1 May 2024 20:42:16 GMT, Chris Plummer wrote:
>> Serguei Spitsyn has updated the pull request incrementally with one
>> additional commit since the last revision:
>>
>> review: Corrections in: 1) JVMTI/JDWP spec; 2) test vthread checks; 3)
>> test comments
>
>
On Thu, 2 May 2024 06:45:39 GMT, Serguei Spitsyn wrote:
>> test/hotspot/jtreg/serviceability/jvmti/ObjectMonitorUsage/ObjectMonitorUsage.java
>> line 257:
>>
>>> 255: // Correct the expected values for the virtual thread case.
>>> 256: int expEnteringCount = isVirtual ?
On Thu, 2 May 2024 07:33:09 GMT, Serguei Spitsyn wrote:
>> The fix is to degrade virtual threads support in the JVM TI
>> `GetObjectMonitorUsage` function so that it is specified to only return an
>> owner when the owner is a platform thread. Also, virtual threads are not
>> listed in the
On Thu, 2 May 2024 07:33:09 GMT, Serguei Spitsyn wrote:
>> The fix is to degrade virtual threads support in the JVM TI
>> `GetObjectMonitorUsage` function so that it is specified to only return an
>> owner when the owner is a platform thread. Also, virtual threads are not
>> listed in the
> The fix is to degrade virtual threads support in the JVM TI
> `GetObjectMonitorUsage` function so that it is specified to only return an
> owner when the owner is a platform thread. Also, virtual threads are not
> listed in the both `waiters` and `notify_waiters` lists returned in the
>
On Wed, 1 May 2024 21:01:16 GMT, Chris Plummer wrote:
>> The fix is to degrade virtual threads support in the JVM TI
>> `GetObjectMonitorUsage` function so that it is specified to only return an
>> owner when the owner is a platform thread. Also, virtual threads are not
>> listed in the both
On Wed, 1 May 2024 21:11:36 GMT, Chris Plummer wrote:
>> The fix is to degrade virtual threads support in the JVM TI
>> `GetObjectMonitorUsage` function so that it is specified to only return an
>> owner when the owner is a platform thread. Also, virtual threads are not
>> listed in the both
On Thu, 2 May 2024 02:49:35 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
>> You can drop "the" from "with the JTREG_TEST_THREAD_FACTORY=Virtual"
>
> And drop "the" from "the GetObjectMonitorUsage".
Thank you. Updated.
-
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19030#discussion_r1587137513
On Thu, 2 May 2024 02:47:19 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
>> Okay, thanks.
>
> Second suggestion is better. "waited by" is not grammatically correct in this
> context.
Thank you, David.
So, the latest version is:
The number of platform threads waiting to own this monitor, or
0
On Wed, 1 May 2024 23:17:58 GMT, Chris Plummer wrote:
>> Good suggestion, thanks. Then I'd suggest this:
>>
>> // Virtual threads are not supported by the GetObjectMonitorUsage.
>> // Correct the expected values if the test is executed with the
>> //
On Thu, 2 May 2024 00:51:20 GMT, Serguei Spitsyn wrote:
>> Copy and paste issue on my part. I would use "if only virtual threads".
>
> Okay, thanks.
Second suggestion is better. "waited by" is not grammatically correct in this
context.
-
PR Review Comment:
On Wed, 1 May 2024 23:16:09 GMT, Chris Plummer wrote:
>> Good suggestion, thanks. But it is more "incorrect". It should say "is
>> waited by" instead of "is owned by":
>>
>>The number of platform threads waiting to own this monitor, or
>> 0
>>if is waited by virtual
On Wed, 1 May 2024 20:40:35 GMT, Chris Plummer wrote:
>> The fix is to degrade virtual threads support in the JVM TI
>> `GetObjectMonitorUsage` function so that it is specified to only return an
>> owner when the owner is a platform thread. Also, virtual threads are not
>> listed in the both
On Wed, 1 May 2024 22:40:02 GMT, Serguei Spitsyn wrote:
>> src/hotspot/share/prims/jvmti.xml line 8266:
>>
>>> 8264:
>>> 8265: The number of platform threads waiting to own this
>>> monitor,
>>> 8266: or 0 if the monitor is owned by a virtual
>>> thread or
On Wed, 1 May 2024 21:03:31 GMT, Chris Plummer wrote:
>> The fix is to degrade virtual threads support in the JVM TI
>> `GetObjectMonitorUsage` function so that it is specified to only return an
>> owner when the owner is a platform thread. Also, virtual threads are not
>> listed in the both
On Wed, 1 May 2024 20:30:54 GMT, Chris Plummer wrote:
>> The fix is to degrade virtual threads support in the JVM TI
>> `GetObjectMonitorUsage` function so that it is specified to only return an
>> owner when the owner is a platform thread. Also, virtual threads are not
>> listed in the both
On Wed, 1 May 2024 20:21:28 GMT, Chris Plummer wrote:
>> The fix is to degrade virtual threads support in the JVM TI
>> `GetObjectMonitorUsage` function so that it is specified to only return an
>> owner when the owner is a platform thread. Also, virtual threads are not
>> listed in the both
On Wed, 1 May 2024 20:21:25 GMT, Chris Plummer wrote:
>> The fix is to degrade virtual threads support in the JVM TI
>> `GetObjectMonitorUsage` function so that it is specified to only return an
>> owner when the owner is a platform thread. Also, virtual threads are not
>> listed in the both
On Wed, 1 May 2024 10:20:52 GMT, Serguei Spitsyn wrote:
> The fix is to degrade virtual threads support in the JVM TI
> `GetObjectMonitorUsage` function so that it is specified to only return an
> owner when the owner is a platform thread. Also, virtual threads are not
> listed in the both
The fix is to degrade virtual threads support in the JVM TI
`GetObjectMonitorUsage` function so that it is specified to only return an
owner when the owner is a platform thread. Also, virtual threads are not listed
in the both `waiters` and `notify_waiters` lists returned in the
45 matches
Mail list logo
