On Tue, 4 Aug 2026 22:17:56 GMT, Shiv Shah <[email protected]> wrote: >> It's unclear to me why your changes to the test resulted in needing to pass >> -trackallthreads. You switched from getThreadIds() to getThreadIdsByName(), >> but both use the set of threads returned by the "threads" command, so I >> don't see why that change would impact the need for -trackallthreads. > > Sorry for the confusion. My “does that match” question was only confirming > that thread002 will continue to test both the threads and thread commands > after the rework; only the discovery setup will change. > > The getThreadIds() to getThreadIdsByName() change did not introduce the need > for -trackallthreads. That change only removed the thread-ordering assumption > identified in Serguei’s comment; both methods still parse the threads output. > > The need arose from the ThreadWrapper conversion. Once the tested threads > become virtual, they are not present in the default threads output before > delivering a debugger event, whereas the platform threads were always > present. Adding -trackallthreads was the broad workaround. I’ll replace it by > having each tested thread pass through a rendezvous breakpoint first. After > jdb learns about them, the existing exact-name lookup and thread <id> checks > work with the default agent behavior. I’ll then remove all the newly added > -trackallthreads options.
Ok. Sounds good. ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/32142#discussion_r3716605800
