On 6 mar 2014, at 01:49, David Holmes <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 6/03/2014 2:51 AM, Staffan Larsen wrote: >> >> On 5 mar 2014, at 14:17, Alan Bateman <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >>> On 04/03/2014 14:43, Staffan Larsen wrote: >>>> The jinfo utility has three flags: >>>> -flag: set/get value of a JVM flag >>>> -flags: print all JVM flags >>>> -sysprops: print all System.properties >>>> >>>> Currently -flags and -sysprops invokes the Serviceability Agent to >>>> get the information. Given how intrusive the SA is this is not ideal. >>>> I have changed the default implementation for these flags to instead >>>> use Diagnostic Commands through the attach framework (this is also >>>> what -flag uses). If you still want to run the SA, you can do so by >>>> specifying -F (or by running on a core file). >>>> >>>> I have changed quite a bit of the (still) hairy argument parsing. The >>>> single basic test for jinfo has also been updated so that all flags >>>> are now exercised on all platforms (not just where SA is available). >>>> >>>> webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sla/8036599/webrev.00/ >>>> bugs: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8036599 >>>> >>> This looks okay to me and it make sense to use the diagnostic commands >>> (they didn't exist when jinfo was originally created). >>> >>> One comment on the updated usage message is that it's not emitted >>> unconditionally so it means that there will be more options that >>> really available when running on a build that doesn't have SA (AIX >>> perhaps? Used to be Windows but this is no longer the case). >> >> Yeah, it was perhaps premature to remove it. I didn’t think we had >> platforms without SA, but perhaps there are. I’ve added it back. > > The SA is only part of the full JDK not the JRE. I'm unclear whether the SA > is needed in the jvm running jinfo, the target jvm, or both. SA needs nothing in the target JVM except the symbols from vmstructs. /Staffan > > David > ----- > > >>> >>> A minor comment on the if-then-else-if- ... in main is that the coding >>> style is inconsistent to the rest of the code (might be an IDE setting). >> >> Fixed. >> >>> Do you know if we have any tests that will exercise -F? Just wondering >>> about the removal of the tests cases. >> >> There are other tests that exercise SA (not enough, though). I added >> back the SA tests with a -F option. >> >> new webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sla/8036599/webrev.01/ >> >> Thanks, >> /Staffan
