On Sun, 27 Jul 2025 21:27:40 GMT, David Holmes <dhol...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>>> Note that java_thread may already be null so we don't get to execute line >>> 836. >> >> I'm having some trouble with this statement. Working backwards from L836, I >> see >> the nullptr check on L826 and the check for non-virtual thread and bail on >> L827 >> and L831. However, if we saw nullptr on L826 and we have a virtual thread, >> then >> we can get to L836 even when we started off with a null java_thread. >> >> So I guess I'm not sure what point you're trying to make with the statement. > >> then we can get to L836 even when we started off with a null java_thread. > > Sure. My point was more the other way round - we could have a null JavaThread > without the null coming from line 836. > > The comment was just trying to expand on my previous comment. Thanks for the clarification. ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/26287#discussion_r2237939518
