Hi David,

On 11/29/18 8:05 PM, David Holmes wrote:
Hi Patricio,

This seems very complicated and I'm not quite seeing how it all goes together. The check for waiting to re-lock now seems to dominant the test and obscure the original checks.

I'm not sure this is worthwhile in the context of this test. It might be much simpler to just get rid of the existing "waiting to re-lock" check which will not be seen and then if we really want to check that case add a much simpler form that just checks for that.
Ok, I actually had similar thoughts while I was adding the extra code. Here is the new webrev:

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~pchilanomate/8214148.02/webrev/

I removed the check for the "waiting to re-lock" case. I'm not sure if it's okay to keep the change to serviceability/tmtools/jstack/utils/DefaultFormat.java then. It doesn't really affect this test, but it is needed for jstack to detect the locks that appear in the stack report with the message "waiting to re-lock in wait()".

Thanks,
Patricio
To me the simplest way to see the "re-lock in wait" case is to just:

synchronized(obj) {
   obj.notifyAll();
   <= take stack dump here =>
}

Cheers,
David

On 30/11/2018 5:52 am, Daniel D. Daugherty wrote:
Adding serviceability-dev@... since the 'tmtools' including 'jstack'
are owned by the Serviceability team.

Dan


On 11/28/18 4:21 PM, Patricio Chilano wrote:
Hi all,

Could you review this fix for test serviceability/tmtools/jstack/WaitNotifyThreadTest.java?

On one hand the test was not properly checking what it was intended to check, since as mentioned in JBS the logic for checking the method name was wrong. Also since there was only one monitor in the test, the "for" loop with the message "waiting to re-lock in wait()" was never actually reached.

Additionally, with change 8150689 the message "waiting to re-lock in wait()" is now shown in the frame where the relocking is actually taking place, so the logic for checking that should change.

I fixed the first issues and added logic to check for the "waiting to re-lock in wait()" case. I used the Thread.State attribute to check desire states are reached before getting the thread dump reports through jstack. I run the test in mach5 several times for all platforms and they all passed.

Webrev URL: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~pchilanomate/8214148.01/webrev
Bug URL: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8214148 <https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8150689>

Thanks,
Patricio


Reply via email to