On Tue, 9 May 2023 22:49:28 GMT, Chris Plummer wrote:
>> This test was very rarely failing with a exitValue 143 from the debuggee. It
>> only happened when the machine was under a lot of stress. After some
>> investigation it was realized that on unix OSes it should *always* expect
>> exitValu
On Tue, 9 May 2023 01:26:43 GMT, Serguei Spitsyn wrote:
> The compatible lifecycle `ThreadStart/ThreadEnd` events were added in JDK 19
> to support legacy virtual thread unaware JVMTI agents which do not enable the
> can_support_virtual_threads capability. When this capability is enabled then
On Tue, 9 May 2023 02:16:18 GMT, Serguei Spitsyn wrote:
>> The compatible lifecycle `ThreadStart/ThreadEnd` events were added in JDK 19
>> to support legacy virtual thread unaware JVMTI agents which do not enable
>> the can_support_virtual_threads capability. When this capability is enabled
>>
> This test was very rarely failing with a exitValue 143 from the debuggee. It
> only happened when the machine was under a lot of stress. After some
> investigation it was realized that on unix OSes it should *always* expect
> exitValue 143, but for some reason was normally getting exitValue 0.
On Tue, 9 May 2023 02:16:18 GMT, Serguei Spitsyn wrote:
>> The compatible lifecycle `ThreadStart/ThreadEnd` events were added in JDK 19
>> to support legacy virtual thread unaware JVMTI agents which do not enable
>> the can_support_virtual_threads capability. When this capability is enabled
>>
On Tue, 9 May 2023 02:16:18 GMT, Serguei Spitsyn wrote:
>> The compatible lifecycle `ThreadStart/ThreadEnd` events were added in JDK 19
>> to support legacy virtual thread unaware JVMTI agents which do not enable
>> the can_support_virtual_threads capability. When this capability is enabled
>>
On Mon, 8 May 2023 21:32:54 GMT, Alex Menkov wrote:
>> The fix updates JVMTI FollowReferences implementation to report references
>> from virtual threads:
>> - unmounted vthreads are detected, their stack references for
>> JVMTI_HEAP_REFERENCE_STACK_LOCAL/JVMTI_HEAP_REFERENCE_JNI_LOCAL;
>> - st
On Tue, 25 Apr 2023 22:22:55 GMT, Alex Menkov wrote:
> The fix updates JVMTI spec updates description of heap functions to support
> virtual threads.
> Virtual threads are not heap roots by design, so
> FollowReference/IterateOverReachableObjects specs are updated to note only
> platform threa
On Mon, 8 May 2023 21:32:54 GMT, Alex Menkov wrote:
>> The fix updates JVMTI FollowReferences implementation to report references
>> from virtual threads:
>> - unmounted vthreads are detected, their stack references for
>> JVMTI_HEAP_REFERENCE_STACK_LOCAL/JVMTI_HEAP_REFERENCE_JNI_LOCAL;
>> - st
On Fri, 5 May 2023 00:47:58 GMT, Leonid Mesnik wrote:
> This fix just excludes a few hotspot/jdk tests which are not compatible with
> test thread factory. So
> `make -- run-test JTREG_VERBOSE=all JTREG_RETAIN=all
> JTREG_TEST_THREAD_FACTORY=Virtual TEST=:tier1`
> could be executed clearly.
On Tue, 9 May 2023 14:58:35 GMT, Kevin Walls wrote:
>> Chris Plummer has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> minor rewording
>
> src/jdk.hotspot.agent/doc/transported_core.html line 98:
>
>> 96:
>> 97:
>> 98: jhsdb -J-Dsun.jvm
On Tue, 9 May 2023 15:17:32 GMT, Kevin Walls wrote:
>> src/jdk.hotspot.agent/doc/transported_core.html line 107:
>>
>>> 105: jhsdb
>>> -J-Dsun.jvm.hotspot.debugger.windbg.symbolPath="%PATH%;srv*https://msdl.microsoft.com/download/symbol";
>>> clhsdb
>>> 106:
>>> 107:
>>
>> If you are not se
> The SA document `transported_core.html` contains some tips on getting core
> files to work when debugging it on a machine other than the one that produced
> it. There are a few improvements that can be made based on information
> provided in [JDK-8306437](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-83
> This fix just excludes a few hotspot/jdk tests which are not compatible with
> test thread factory. So
> `make -- run-test JTREG_VERBOSE=all JTREG_RETAIN=all
> JTREG_TEST_THREAD_FACTORY=Virtual TEST=:tier1`
> could be executed clearly.
Leonid Mesnik has updated the pull request with a new
On Tue, 9 May 2023 14:02:26 GMT, Coleen Phillimore wrote:
>> The ResourceHashtable conversion for JDK-8292741 didn't add the resizing
>> code. The old hashtable code was tuned for resizing in anticipation of
>> large hashtables for JVMTI tags. This patch ports over the old hashtable
>> resiz
On Mon, 8 May 2023 10:09:29 GMT, Johan Sjölen wrote:
>> Hi, this PR changes all occurrences of NULL to nullptr for the subdirectory
>> share/jfr/. Unfortunately the script that does the change isn't perfect, and
>> so we
>> need to comb through these manually to make sure nothing has gone wrong
On Tue, 9 May 2023 14:02:26 GMT, Coleen Phillimore wrote:
>> The ResourceHashtable conversion for JDK-8292741 didn't add the resizing
>> code. The old hashtable code was tuned for resizing in anticipation of
>> large hashtables for JVMTI tags. This patch ports over the old hashtable
>> resiz
On Tue, 9 May 2023 02:16:18 GMT, Serguei Spitsyn wrote:
>> The compatible lifecycle `ThreadStart/ThreadEnd` events were added in JDK 19
>> to support legacy virtual thread unaware JVMTI agents which do not enable
>> the can_support_virtual_threads capability. When this capability is enabled
>>
On Tue, 9 May 2023 02:16:18 GMT, Serguei Spitsyn wrote:
>> The compatible lifecycle `ThreadStart/ThreadEnd` events were added in JDK 19
>> to support legacy virtual thread unaware JVMTI agents which do not enable
>> the can_support_virtual_threads capability. When this capability is enabled
>>
On Tue, 9 May 2023 14:02:26 GMT, Coleen Phillimore wrote:
>> The ResourceHashtable conversion for JDK-8292741 didn't add the resizing
>> code. The old hashtable code was tuned for resizing in anticipation of
>> large hashtables for JVMTI tags. This patch ports over the old hashtable
>> resiz
On Tue, 9 May 2023 09:12:51 GMT, Afshin Zafari wrote:
> This PR is continuation of https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/13420 which
> was far behind the master.
The cleanups here look really good and solve the issue of the finalize function
warnings. Any further refactoring or improvements to
On Tue, 9 May 2023 12:55:42 GMT, Stefan Karlsson wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Please review the implementation of Generational ZGC, which can be turned on
>> by adding -XX:+ZGenerational in addition to using -XX:+UseZGC. Generational
>> ZGC is a major rewrite of the non-generational ZGC version tha
On Tue, 9 May 2023 15:16:22 GMT, Kevin Walls wrote:
>> Chris Plummer has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> minor rewording
>
> src/jdk.hotspot.agent/doc/transported_core.html line 107:
>
>> 105: jhsdb
>> -J-Dsun.jvm.hotspot.d
On Tue, 9 May 2023 00:01:09 GMT, Chris Plummer wrote:
>> The SA document `transported_core.html` contains some tips on getting core
>> files to work when debugging it on a machine other than the one that
>> produced it. There are a few improvements that can be made based on
>> information prov
On Tue, 9 May 2023 00:01:09 GMT, Chris Plummer wrote:
>> The SA document `transported_core.html` contains some tips on getting core
>> files to work when debugging it on a machine other than the one that
>> produced it. There are a few improvements that can be made based on
>> information prov
On Tue, 9 May 2023 00:01:09 GMT, Chris Plummer wrote:
>> The SA document `transported_core.html` contains some tips on getting core
>> files to work when debugging it on a machine other than the one that
>> produced it. There are a few improvements that can be made based on
>> information prov
On Tue, 9 May 2023 01:21:14 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
>> Paul Hohensee has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Implement 32-bit linux Atomic::add()
>
> src/hotspot/share/services/threadService.cpp line 224:
>
>> 222:
>> 223: d
On Tue, 9 May 2023 01:02:32 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
>> If the `thread` is no longer on any ThreadsList, then it is not safe to
>> access `thread`.
>
> @dcubed-ojdk This is the current thread acting on itself
This method (i.e. `ThreadService::remove_thread()`) is called from
`Threads::remove()
On Tue, 9 May 2023 07:58:36 GMT, Serguei Spitsyn wrote:
>> Coleen Phillimore has updated the pull request incrementally with one
>> additional commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Rename and comment put_when_absent.
>
> src/hotspot/share/prims/jvmtiTagMapTable.cpp line 50:
>
>> 48: _wh
> The ResourceHashtable conversion for JDK-8292741 didn't add the resizing
> code. The old hashtable code was tuned for resizing in anticipation of large
> hashtables for JVMTI tags. This patch ports over the old hashtable resizing
> code. It also adds a ResourceHashtable::put_fast() function
On Tue, 9 May 2023 13:16:00 GMT, Thomas Stuefe wrote:
>> This small change ensures that repeated bytecode rewrites necessitated by
>> class pool index updates are applied cumulatively when updating the method
>> line number table. The current code applies each change to the original
>> table w
On Tue, 9 May 2023 02:18:49 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
>> My preference is to eventually make 'put' be 'put-ifwhen-absent', so I don't
>> care which name you two pick.
>
> `put_when_known_absent`?
>
> A basic `put` should either add or replace; a `put_if_absent` should only add
> else do nothin
On Thu, 4 May 2023 09:26:33 GMT, Andrew Dinn wrote:
> This small change ensures that repeated bytecode rewrites necessitated by
> class pool index updates are applied cumulatively when updating the method
> line number table. The current code applies each change to the original table
> which m
On Thu, 4 May 2023 09:26:33 GMT, Andrew Dinn wrote:
> This small change ensures that repeated bytecode rewrites necessitated by
> class pool index updates are applied cumulatively when updating the method
> line number table. The current code applies each change to the original table
> which m
> Hi all,
>
> Please review the implementation of Generational ZGC, which can be turned on
> by adding -XX:+ZGenerational in addition to using -XX:+UseZGC. Generational
> ZGC is a major rewrite of the non-generational ZGC version that exists in the
> openjdk/jdk repository. It splits the heap i
> Hi all,
>
> Please review the implementation of Generational ZGC, which can be turned on
> by adding -XX:+ZGenerational in addition to using -XX:+UseZGC. Generational
> ZGC is a major rewrite of the non-generational ZGC version that exists in the
> openjdk/jdk repository. It splits the heap i
On Thu, 4 May 2023 09:26:33 GMT, Andrew Dinn wrote:
> This small change ensures that repeated bytecode rewrites necessitated by
> class pool index updates are applied cumulatively when updating the method
> line number table. The current code applies each change to the original table
> which m
On Tue, 9 May 2023 09:57:55 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
>> This small change ensures that repeated bytecode rewrites necessitated by
>> class pool index updates are applied cumulatively when updating the method
>> line number table. The current code applies each change to the original
>> table wh
On Tue, 9 May 2023 08:47:38 GMT, Serguei Spitsyn wrote:
>> @dholmes-ora Apologies for jumping the gun. Do I need to obtain a second,
>> retrospective review?
>
>> Do I need to obtain a second, retrospective review?
>
> Yes, Serviceability changes need two reviews unless they are not trivial.
@
On Tue, 9 May 2023 07:27:46 GMT, Kim Barrett wrote:
>> Stefan Karlsson has updated the pull request incrementally with one
>> additional commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Workaround failed reservation in ZForwardingTest
>
> src/hotspot/share/code/relocInfo.hpp line 1105:
>
>> 1103: int
On Sun, 7 May 2023 22:17:56 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
> This is a tricky issue to solve cleanly and minimally. If every class
> extended FinalizableObject then all the implementation could go there, but we
> have to try and split things across FinalizableObject and Finalizable because
> some cl
On Tue, 9 May 2023 09:12:51 GMT, Afshin Zafari wrote:
> This PR is continuation of https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/13420 which
> was far behind the master.
reply to @dholmes-ora comment:
> I think a better design for the classes that can't extend FinalizableObject
> would be for them to co
On Tue, 9 May 2023 09:12:51 GMT, Afshin Zafari wrote:
> This PR is continuation of https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/13420 which
> was far behind the master.
Brief reminder from original PR:
- `Finalizable` interface has `default` methods for `cleanup` and
`registerCleanup`.
- `FinalizableOb
On Mon, 8 May 2023 11:33:05 GMT, Afshin Zafari wrote:
>> The `finalize()` method is removed from base classes/interfaces and are
>> replaced by a Cleaner callback..
>
> Afshin Zafari has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
> merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains
On Fri, 5 May 2023 19:10:49 GMT, Coleen Phillimore wrote:
>> Afshin Zafari has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
>> merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains seven commits:
>>
>> - Merge master
>> - Merge branch 'master' into _8305083
>> - Merge master
>> - 830
This PR is continuation of https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/13420 which was
far behind the master.
-
Commit messages:
- 8305083: Remove finalize() from test/hotspot/jtreg/vmTestbase/nsk/share/ and
/jpda that are used in serviceability/dcmd/framework tests
Changes: https://git.o
On Tue, 9 May 2023 08:37:43 GMT, Andrew Dinn wrote:
> Do I need to obtain a second, retrospective review?
Yes, Serviceability changes need two reviews unless they are not trivial.
-
PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/13795#issuecomment-1539707980
On Tue, 9 May 2023 06:06:11 GMT, Stefan Karlsson wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Please review the implementation of Generational ZGC, which can be turned on
>> by adding -XX:+ZGenerational in addition to using -XX:+UseZGC. Generational
>> ZGC is a major rewrite of the non-generational ZGC version tha
On Sun, 7 May 2023 21:58:16 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
>> Afshin Zafari has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
>> merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains four commits:
>>
>> - Merge branch 'master' into _8305083
>> - 8305083: 8305083: Remove finalize() from
>> te
On Mon, 8 May 2023 06:57:09 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
>> @sspitsyn Thanks for the review.
>
> @adinn Please wait for two reviews for hotspot changes unless designated as
> trivial. Thanks.
@dholmes-ora Apologies for jumping the gun. Do I need to obtain a second,
retrospective review?
-
On Sun, 7 May 2023 21:41:23 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
>> Afshin Zafari has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
>> merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains four commits:
>>
>> - Merge branch 'master' into _8305083
>> - 8305083: 8305083: Remove finalize() from
>> te
On Mon, 8 May 2023 14:15:18 GMT, Coleen Phillimore wrote:
>> The ResourceHashtable conversion for JDK-8292741 didn't add the resizing
>> code. The old hashtable code was tuned for resizing in anticipation of
>> large hashtables for JVMTI tags. This patch ports over the old hashtable
>> resiz
52 matches
Mail list logo
