On Tue, 28 Apr 2026 05:08:19 GMT, David Holmes <[email protected]> wrote:

>> Please review this change to fix a problem that can rise if JVM TI 
>> suspension is allowed when a thread is executing in a JNI "critical" region. 
>> The gory details are in the first comment so that the PR emails are shorter
>> 
>> A new test is introduced to check that we cannot suspend in a critical region
>> 
>> Other testing:
>> - Tiers 1-5 on all platforms
>> 
>> The key insights into this solution are attributed to @pchilano. Everything 
>> simpler I tried was buggy and led me back to Patricio's suggested changes to 
>> the operation filtering. The actual details of this and any remaining bugs 
>> in it are all my own.
>> 
>> Thanks.
>> 
>> ---------
>> - [x] I confirm that I make this contribution in accordance with the 
>> [OpenJDK Interim AI Policy](https://openjdk.org/legal/ai).
>
> David Holmes has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional 
> commit since the last revision:
> 
>   Use std::atomic for shared variables

src/hotspot/share/prims/jni.cpp line 2839:

> 2837: 
> 2838:   // We must defer JVM TI suspension while we have access to a Java 
> object
> 2839:   // as it could suprise the debugger if we mutate it concurrently 
> whilst

Q: I guess, the word `suprise` was used intentionally instead of `surprise`.

-------------

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/30936#discussion_r3159507482

Reply via email to