On Sun, 12 Jul 2026 21:25:24 GMT, David Holmes <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Joe is also suggesting to summarize the value objects impact on JVMTI >> functions and events. I'm thinking if the following would be good to add: >> >> diff --git a/src/hotspot/share/prims/jvmti.xml >> b/src/hotspot/share/prims/jvmti.xml >> index cbdecfc1cb1..33202ac6b5d 100644 >> --- a/src/hotspot/share/prims/jvmti.xml >> +++ b/src/hotspot/share/prims/jvmti.xml >> @@ -930,6 +930,16 @@ Agent_OnUnload_L(JavaVM *vm)</example> >> (instances of value classes) will not. <jvmti/> makes no distinction >> between these cases >> in general, but some specific functions will behave differently if >> invoked upon >> a Java object that does not have identity. >> + <p/> >> + Value objects can be tagged. Tags for value objects follow value >> equality >> + semantics, and tagged value objects are kept alive while tagged. The >> + <eventlink id="ObjectFree"/> event is not sent for tagged value objects. >> + <p/> >> + Value objects also affect allocation events, including >> + <eventlink id="VMObjectAlloc"/> and <eventlink >> id="SampledObjectAlloc"/>, >> + and functions related to value object constructor frames, including >> + <functionlink id="GetLocalInstance"/>, <functionlink >> id="GetLocalObject"/>, >> + and <functionlink id="ForceEarlyReturnVoid"/>. >> </intro> >> >> <functionsection label="Functions"> > > If there was a "what's new" section then I would agree, but I don't think it > is appropriate to add this here. The places where value objects affect JVM TI > should be described clearly in the JEP and in any associated release note IMO. Agreed, thanks. ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/valhalla/pull/2634#discussion_r3577140761
