Cheleswer, Looks good for me. Reviewed.
-Dmitry On 2016-04-07 16:50, Cheleswer Sahu wrote: > Hi , > Thanks for your review and suggestion. I agree that sleep is not the best and > reliable way to achieve the objective of test case. I also found the idea of > using j.u.c.CountDownLatch very easy and effective. I have made some changes > in the code. Please review the code changes in the below link > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~csahu/8153319/webrev.01/ > > > Regards, > Cheleswer > -----Original Message----- > From: Leonid Mesnik > Sent: Tuesday, April 05, 2016 7:00 PM > To: Cheleswer Sahu; hotspot-runtime-...@openjdk.java.net; > serviceability-dev@openjdk.java.net > Subject: Re: RFR[9u-dev]: 8153319: new test > serviceability/tmtools/jstack/JstackThreadTest.java fails > > Hi > > I don't think that sleep is a good way to ensure that thread is started. > It is not reliable on the slow host / VM under stress and just waste of time > on fast host. > Is it possible just to add any explicit synchronization to ensure that > NamedThread is started? > > Leonid > > On 05.04.2016 13:23, Cheleswer Sahu wrote: >> Hi, >> >> >> >> Please review the code changes for >> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8153319. >> >> >> >> Webrev link: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~csahu/8153319/ >> >> >> >> >> >> Bug Brief: Test is failing on some platforms. >> >> >> >> Problem Identified: Newly created child thread (NamedThread) is finished >> its execution before main thread calls "jstack", which result in test >> failure. >> >> >> >> Solution Proposed: Set the child thread in sleep state for forever and make >> sure that "jstack " tool always gets executed after " NamedThread" is >> started. >> >> >> >> >> >> Regards, >> >> Cheleswer >> >> >> >> > -- Dmitry Samersoff Oracle Java development team, Saint Petersburg, Russia * I would love to change the world, but they won't give me the sources.
