On 20/10/2020 5:20 pm, Robbin Ehn wrote:
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.
Not clear to me this is so generic that it applies to Handshake::execute
rather than being part of the operation. ??
David
-----
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
