On Tue, 20 Oct 2020 02:22:15 GMT, David Holmes <dhol...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> The main point of this change-set is to make it easier to implement S/R on
>> top of handshakes.
>> Which is a prerequisite for removing _suspend_flag (which duplicates the
>> handshake functionality).
>> But we also remove some complicated S/R methods.
>>
>> We basically just put in everything in the handshake closure, so the diff
>> just looks much worse than what it is.
>>
>> TraceSuspendDebugBits have an ifdef, but in both cases it now just returns.
>> But I was unsure if I should remove now or when is_ext_suspend_completed()
>> is removed.
>>
>> Passes multiple t1-5 runs, locally it passes many
>> jck:vm/nsk_jvmti/nsk_jdi/jdk-jdi runs.
>
> src/hotspot/share/prims/jvmtiEnv.cpp line 1648:
>
>> 1646: op.doit(java_thread, true);
>> 1647: } else {
>> 1648: Handshake::execute(&op, java_thread);
>
> This pattern is repeated a lot - we should be able to incorporate it into the
> op itself by passing in `java_thread`.
My suggestion here is that we fix this in Handshake::execute() in separate RFE.
> src/hotspot/share/prims/jvmtiEnvBase.cpp line 1525:
>
>> 1523: Thread* current_thread = Thread::current();
>> 1524: HandleMark hm(current_thread);
>> 1525: JavaThread* java_thread = target->as_Java_thread();
>
> Contrast with the same three lines at L1390 - we should use the same
> boilerplate in each `doit`. And ideally refactor
> into some shared code somewhere (future RFE).
Yes, that would be good.
-------------
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/729
