On Wed, 11 Sep 2024 07:00:25 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
>> If these are just methods that might be seen in a stackdump then we still
>> need `ThreadSleepEvent.isEnabled` and `ThreadSleepEvent.`.
>
>> If these are just methods that might be seen in a stackdump then we still
>> need `ThreadSleepEve
On Wed, 11 Sep 2024 06:18:25 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
> If these are just methods that might be seen in a stackdump then we still
> need `ThreadSleepEvent.isEnabled` and `ThreadSleepEvent.`.
I think minimal here is to just drop isTurnedOn from lists in these tests. From
what I can tell, the te
On Tue, 10 Sep 2024 21:01:24 GMT, Viktor Klang wrote:
>> This PR applies @AlanBateman's patch from the JBS issue.
>
> Viktor Klang has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
> commit since the last revision:
>
> Removing ThreadSleepEvent from stack trace checks
If these a
On Wed, 11 Sep 2024 02:28:45 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
> With regards to the nsk tests, are `beforeSleep` and `afterSleep` still
> potential candidates now that it is impossible for them to throw OOME?
These tests are sampling and checking for specific methods and call stacks, I
don't think the
On Tue, 10 Sep 2024 21:01:24 GMT, Viktor Klang wrote:
>> This PR applies @AlanBateman's patch from the JBS issue.
>
> Viktor Klang has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
> commit since the last revision:
>
> Removing ThreadSleepEvent from stack trace checks
With regar
> This PR applies @AlanBateman's patch from the JBS issue.
Viktor Klang has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
commit since the last revision:
Removing ThreadSleepEvent from stack trace checks
-
Changes:
- all: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/20923/file
