Re: RFR: 8329332: Remove CompiledMethod and CodeBlobLayout classes [v2]

2024-04-02 Thread Vladimir Ivanov
On Mon, 1 Apr 2024 21:07:31 GMT, Vladimir Kozlov wrote: >> Revert [JDK-8152664](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8152664) RFE >> [changes](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/commit/b853eb7f5ca24eeeda18acbb14287f706499c365) >> which was used for AOT [JEP 295](https://openjdk.org/jeps/295) >> imp

Re: RFR: 8313332: Simplify lazy jmethodID cache in InstanceKlass

2024-04-02 Thread Serguei Spitsyn
On Fri, 29 Mar 2024 15:25:48 GMT, Coleen Phillimore wrote: > This change simplifies the code that grows the jmethodID cache in > InstanceKlass. Instead of lazily, when there's a rare request for a > jmethodID for an obsolete method, the jmethodID cache is grown during the > RedefineClasses sa

Re: RFR: JDK-8327474 Review use of java.io.tmpdir in jdk tests [v5]

2024-04-02 Thread Jaikiran Pai
On Tue, 2 Apr 2024 16:29:21 GMT, Bill Huang wrote: >> This task addresses an essential aspect of our testing infrastructure: the >> proper handling and cleanup of temporary files and socket files created >> during test execution. The motivation behind these changes is to prevent the >> accumul

Integrated: JDK-8328137: PreserveAllAnnotations can cause failure of class retransformation

2024-04-02 Thread Alex Menkov
On Thu, 28 Mar 2024 22:12:49 GMT, Alex Menkov wrote: > PreserveAllAnnotations option causes class file parser to preserve > RuntimeInvisibleAnnotations so VM considers them as RuntimeVisibleAnnotations. > For class retransformation JvmtiClassFileReconstituter restores all > annotations as Runti

Re: RFR: JDK-8328137: PreserveAllAnnotations can cause failure of class retransformation

2024-04-02 Thread Alex Menkov
On Tue, 2 Apr 2024 19:13:15 GMT, Coleen Phillimore wrote: > At one point long ago, I was trying to understand why we have > PreserveAllAnnotations and couldn't come up with a reason. For a class file > reconstitutor, restoring the invisible annotations to the classfile and then > feeding it ba

Re: RFR: 8329491: GetThreadListStackTraces function should use JvmtiHandshake [v2]

2024-04-02 Thread Serguei Spitsyn
On Tue, 2 Apr 2024 22:20:12 GMT, Patricio Chilano Mateo wrote: >> Serguei Spitsyn has updated the pull request incrementally with one >> additional commit since the last revision: >> >> review: cleanup - removed temporary logging used for debugging > > src/hotspot/share/prims/jvmtiEnvBase.cp

Re: RFR: 8329491: GetThreadListStackTraces function should use JvmtiHandshake [v2]

2024-04-02 Thread Serguei Spitsyn
On Tue, 2 Apr 2024 23:52:33 GMT, Serguei Spitsyn wrote: >> The internal JVM TI `JvmtiHandshake` and `JvmtiUnitedHandshakeClosure` >> classes were introduced in the JDK 22 to unify/simplify the JVM TI functions >> supporting implementation of the virtual threads. This enhancement is to >> refac

Re: RFR: 8329491: GetThreadListStackTraces function should use JvmtiHandshake [v2]

2024-04-02 Thread Serguei Spitsyn
> The internal JVM TI `JvmtiHandshake` and `JvmtiUnitedHandshakeClosure` > classes were introduced in the JDK 22 to unify/simplify the JVM TI functions > supporting implementation of the virtual threads. This enhancement is to > refactor the JVM TI function `GetThreadListStackTraces` on the base

Re: RFR: 8329432: PopFrame and ForceEarlyReturn functions should use JvmtiHandshake

2024-04-02 Thread Patricio Chilano Mateo
On Tue, 2 Apr 2024 00:22:28 GMT, Serguei Spitsyn wrote: > The internal JVM TI `JvmtiHandshake` and `JvmtiUnitedHandshakeClosure` > classes were introduced in the JDK 22 to unify/simplify the JVM TI functions > supporting implementation of the virtual threads. This enhancement is to > refactor

Re: RFR: 8329491: GetThreadListStackTraces function should use JvmtiHandshake

2024-04-02 Thread Patricio Chilano Mateo
On Tue, 2 Apr 2024 08:13:20 GMT, Serguei Spitsyn wrote: > The internal JVM TI `JvmtiHandshake` and `JvmtiUnitedHandshakeClosure` > classes were introduced in the JDK 22 to unify/simplify the JVM TI functions > supporting implementation of the virtual threads. This enhancement is to > refactor

Re: RFR: 8236736: Change notproduct JVM flags to develop flags [v4]

2024-04-02 Thread Ioi Lam
On Tue, 2 Apr 2024 20:18:34 GMT, Kim Barrett wrote: > > Thanks for reviewing, Kim. Is your suggestion to not have a JVMFlag object > > for develop flags in PRODUCT builds? Presumably to save some footprint? I'm > > not sure we would win fighting the macros to accomplish this. > > Yes, that's t

Re: RFR: JDK-8322042: HeapDumper should perform merge on the current thread instead of VMThread [v2]

2024-04-02 Thread Alex Menkov
On Tue, 2 Apr 2024 20:44:13 GMT, Serguei Spitsyn wrote: >> Alex Menkov has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional >> commit since the last revision: >> >> comment > > src/hotspot/share/services/heapDumper.cpp line 2648: > >> 2646: >> 2647: DumpMerger merger(path, &writ

Re: RFR: JDK-8322042: HeapDumper should perform merge on the current thread instead of VMThread [v2]

2024-04-02 Thread Alex Menkov
On Tue, 2 Apr 2024 02:04:17 GMT, Yi Yang wrote: > * jcmd GC.heap_dump command; `AttachListenerThread` > > * HotSpotDiagnosticMXBean.dumpHeap(); `JavaThread` > > * HeapDumpBeforeFullGC, HeapDumpAfterFullGC VM options; `VMThread` > > * HeapDumpOnOutOfMemoryError VM option. `VMThread`

Re: RFR: JDK-8322042: HeapDumper should perform merge on the current thread instead of VMThread [v2]

2024-04-02 Thread Alex Menkov
> The fix updated HeapDumper to always perform merge on the current thread. > > Testing: tier1-5, all HeapDump-related tests > Covered heap dumping scenarios: > - `jcmd GC.heap_dump` command; > - `HotSpotDiagnosticMXBean.dumpHeap()`; > - `HeapDumpBeforeFullGC`, `HeapDumpAfterFullGC`

Re: RFR: JDK-8322042: HeapDumper should perform merge on the current thread instead of VMThread

2024-04-02 Thread Serguei Spitsyn
On Tue, 2 Apr 2024 00:40:37 GMT, Alex Menkov wrote: > The fix updated HeapDumper to always perform merge on the current thread. > > Testing: tier1-5, all HeapDump-related tests > Covered heap dumping scenarios: > - `jcmd GC.heap_dump` command; > - `HotSpotDiagnosticMXBean.dumpHeap()`;

Re: RFR: JDK-8328137: PreserveAllAnnotations can cause failure of class retransformation

2024-04-02 Thread Serguei Spitsyn
On Thu, 28 Mar 2024 22:12:49 GMT, Alex Menkov wrote: > PreserveAllAnnotations option causes class file parser to preserve > RuntimeInvisibleAnnotations so VM considers them as RuntimeVisibleAnnotations. > For class retransformation JvmtiClassFileReconstituter restores all > annotations as Runti

Re: RFR: 8236736: Change notproduct JVM flags to develop flags [v4]

2024-04-02 Thread Kim Barrett
On Tue, 2 Apr 2024 19:51:03 GMT, Coleen Phillimore wrote: > Thanks for reviewing, Kim. Is your suggestion to not have a JVMFlag object > for develop flags in PRODUCT builds? Presumably to save some footprint? I'm > not sure we would win fighting the macros to accomplish this. Yes, that's the s

Re: RFR: 8236736: Change notproduct JVM flags to develop flags [v4]

2024-04-02 Thread Coleen Phillimore
On Tue, 2 Apr 2024 19:47:23 GMT, Coleen Phillimore wrote: >> Remove the notproduct distinction for command line options, rather than >> trying to wrestle the macros to fix the bug that they've been treated as >> develop options for some time now. This simplifies the command line option >> mac

Re: RFR: 8236736: Change notproduct JVM flags to develop flags [v4]

2024-04-02 Thread Coleen Phillimore
> Remove the notproduct distinction for command line options, rather than > trying to wrestle the macros to fix the bug that they've been treated as > develop options for some time now. This simplifies the command line option > macros. > > Tested with tier1-4, tier1 on Oracle platforms. Also

Re: RFR: 8236736: Change notproduct JVM flags to develop flags [v3]

2024-04-02 Thread Coleen Phillimore
On Tue, 2 Apr 2024 17:58:16 GMT, Kim Barrett wrote: >> Coleen Phillimore has updated the pull request incrementally with one >> additional commit since the last revision: >> >> Fix a couple issues pointed out by Stefank. > > test/hotspot/jtreg/runtime/CommandLine/VMOptionWarning.java line 64:

Re: RFR: JDK-8328137: PreserveAllAnnotations can cause failure of class retransformation

2024-04-02 Thread Coleen Phillimore
On Thu, 28 Mar 2024 22:12:49 GMT, Alex Menkov wrote: > PreserveAllAnnotations option causes class file parser to preserve > RuntimeInvisibleAnnotations so VM considers them as RuntimeVisibleAnnotations. > For class retransformation JvmtiClassFileReconstituter restores all > annotations as Runti

Re: RFR: 8236736: Change notproduct JVM flags to develop flags [v3]

2024-04-02 Thread Kim Barrett
On Tue, 2 Apr 2024 17:25:12 GMT, Coleen Phillimore wrote: >> Remove the notproduct distinction for command line options, rather than >> trying to wrestle the macros to fix the bug that they've been treated as >> develop options for some time now. This simplifies the command line option >> mac

Re: RFR: 8236736: Change notproduct JVM flags to develop flags [v3]

2024-04-02 Thread Vladimir Kozlov
On Tue, 2 Apr 2024 17:25:12 GMT, Coleen Phillimore wrote: >> Remove the notproduct distinction for command line options, rather than >> trying to wrestle the macros to fix the bug that they've been treated as >> develop options for some time now. This simplifies the command line option >> mac

Re: RFR: 8236736: Change notproduct JVM flags to develop flags [v3]

2024-04-02 Thread Coleen Phillimore
On Tue, 2 Apr 2024 17:25:12 GMT, Coleen Phillimore wrote: >> Remove the notproduct distinction for command line options, rather than >> trying to wrestle the macros to fix the bug that they've been treated as >> develop options for some time now. This simplifies the command line option >> mac

Re: RFR: 8236736: Change notproduct JVM flags to develop flags [v3]

2024-04-02 Thread Vladimir Kozlov
On Tue, 2 Apr 2024 17:58:47 GMT, Coleen Phillimore wrote: > For optimized, all the develop and notproduct options are materialized. Okay, I see what you did here. You touched only flags declaration and did not `#ifndef PRODUCT` which guards statistics code, for example. Optimized VM build will

Re: RFR: 8236736: Change notproduct JVM flags to develop flags [v3]

2024-04-02 Thread Vladimir Kozlov
On Tue, 2 Apr 2024 17:25:12 GMT, Coleen Phillimore wrote: >> Remove the notproduct distinction for command line options, rather than >> trying to wrestle the macros to fix the bug that they've been treated as >> develop options for some time now. This simplifies the command line option >> mac

Re: RFR: 8236736: Change notproduct JVM flags to develop flags [v3]

2024-04-02 Thread Coleen Phillimore
On Tue, 2 Apr 2024 17:25:12 GMT, Coleen Phillimore wrote: >> Remove the notproduct distinction for command line options, rather than >> trying to wrestle the macros to fix the bug that they've been treated as >> develop options for some time now. This simplifies the command line option >> mac

Re: RFR: 8236736: Change notproduct JVM flags to develop flags [v3]

2024-04-02 Thread Vladimir Kozlov
On Tue, 2 Apr 2024 17:25:12 GMT, Coleen Phillimore wrote: >> Remove the notproduct distinction for command line options, rather than >> trying to wrestle the macros to fix the bug that they've been treated as >> develop options for some time now. This simplifies the command line option >> mac

Re: RFR: 8236736: Change notproduct JVM flags to develop flags [v3]

2024-04-02 Thread Coleen Phillimore
> Remove the notproduct distinction for command line options, rather than > trying to wrestle the macros to fix the bug that they've been treated as > develop options for some time now. This simplifies the command line option > macros. > > Tested with tier1-4, tier1 on Oracle platforms. Also

Re: RFR: 8236736: Change notproduct JVM flags to develop flags [v2]

2024-04-02 Thread Coleen Phillimore
On Tue, 2 Apr 2024 16:49:19 GMT, Stefan Karlsson wrote: >> Coleen Phillimore has updated the pull request incrementally with one >> additional commit since the last revision: >> >> Clean up notproduct from tests. > > src/hotspot/share/runtime/arguments.cpp line 3420: > >> 3418: static void a

Re: RFR: 8236736: Change notproduct JVM flags to develop flags [v2]

2024-04-02 Thread Coleen Phillimore
On Tue, 2 Apr 2024 16:24:19 GMT, Coleen Phillimore wrote: >> Remove the notproduct distinction for command line options, rather than >> trying to wrestle the macros to fix the bug that they've been treated as >> develop options for some time now. This simplifies the command line option >> mac

Re: RFR: 8236736: Change notproduct JVM flags to develop flags [v2]

2024-04-02 Thread Stefan Karlsson
On Tue, 2 Apr 2024 16:24:19 GMT, Coleen Phillimore wrote: >> Remove the notproduct distinction for command line options, rather than >> trying to wrestle the macros to fix the bug that they've been treated as >> develop options for some time now. This simplifies the command line option >> mac

Re: RFR: JDK-8327474 Review use of java.io.tmpdir in jdk tests [v5]

2024-04-02 Thread Bill Huang
> This task addresses an essential aspect of our testing infrastructure: the > proper handling and cleanup of temporary files and socket files created > during test execution. The motivation behind these changes is to prevent the > accumulation of unnecessary files in the default temporary direc

Re: RFR: 8236736: Change notproduct JVM flags to develop flags [v2]

2024-04-02 Thread Ioi Lam
On Tue, 2 Apr 2024 16:21:15 GMT, Coleen Phillimore wrote: >> Remove the notproduct distinction for command line options, rather than >> trying to wrestle the macros to fix the bug that they've been treated as >> develop options for some time now. This simplifies the command line option >> mac

Re: RFR: 8236736: Change notproduct JVM flags to develop flags

2024-04-02 Thread Coleen Phillimore
On Thu, 28 Mar 2024 22:53:22 GMT, Coleen Phillimore wrote: > Remove the notproduct distinction for command line options, rather than > trying to wrestle the macros to fix the bug that they've been treated as > develop options for some time now. This simplifies the command line option > macros

Re: RFR: 8236736: Change notproduct JVM flags to develop flags [v2]

2024-04-02 Thread Coleen Phillimore
> Remove the notproduct distinction for command line options, rather than > trying to wrestle the macros to fix the bug that they've been treated as > develop options for some time now. This simplifies the command line option > macros. > > Tested with tier1-4, tier1 on Oracle platforms. Also

Re: RFR: 8236736: Change notproduct JVM flags to develop flags

2024-04-02 Thread Ioi Lam
On Thu, 28 Mar 2024 22:53:22 GMT, Coleen Phillimore wrote: > Remove the notproduct distinction for command line options, rather than > trying to wrestle the macros to fix the bug that they've been treated as > develop options for some time now. This simplifies the command line option > macros

Re: RFR: JDK-8327474 Review use of java.io.tmpdir in jdk tests [v4]

2024-04-02 Thread Jaikiran Pai
On Tue, 26 Mar 2024 18:18:39 GMT, Bill Huang wrote: >> This task addresses an essential aspect of our testing infrastructure: the >> proper handling and cleanup of temporary files and socket files created >> during test execution. The motivation behind these changes is to prevent the >> accumu

Re: RFR: JDK-8327474 Review use of java.io.tmpdir in jdk tests [v4]

2024-04-02 Thread Jaikiran Pai
On Tue, 26 Mar 2024 18:18:39 GMT, Bill Huang wrote: >> This task addresses an essential aspect of our testing infrastructure: the >> proper handling and cleanup of temporary files and socket files created >> during test execution. The motivation behind these changes is to prevent the >> accumu

RFR: 8236736: Change notproduct JVM flags to develop flags

2024-04-02 Thread Coleen Phillimore
Remove the notproduct distinction for command line options, rather than trying to wrestle the macros to fix the bug that they've been treated as develop options for some time now. This simplifies the command line option macros. Tested with tier1-4, tier1 on Oracle platforms. Also built shenand

Re: RFR: 8318026: jcmd should provide access to detailed JVM object information [v9]

2024-04-02 Thread Andrew Dinn
On Thu, 28 Mar 2024 17:15:26 GMT, Kevin Walls wrote: >>> In my opinion, UnlockDiagnosticVMOptions is not a good enough safeguard >>> since it guards a whole swathe of switches that we may instruct the >>> customer to enable. Once enabled, my experience is that >>> UnlockDiagnosticVMOptions oft

Re: RFR: 8313332: Simplify lazy jmethodID cache in InstanceKlass

2024-04-02 Thread Coleen Phillimore
On Fri, 29 Mar 2024 15:25:48 GMT, Coleen Phillimore wrote: > This change simplifies the code that grows the jmethodID cache in > InstanceKlass. Instead of lazily, when there's a rare request for a > jmethodID for an obsolete method, the jmethodID cache is grown during the > RedefineClasses sa

RFR: 8329491: GetThreadListStackTraces function should use JvmtiHandshake

2024-04-02 Thread Serguei Spitsyn
The internal JVM TI `JvmtiHandshake` and `JvmtiUnitedHandshakeClosure` classes were introduced in the JDK 22 to unify/simplify the JVM TI functions supporting implementation of the virtual threads. This enhancement is to refactor the JVM TI function `GetThreadListStackTraces` on the base of `Jvm