On Thu, 25 May 2023 14:47:59 GMT, Serguei Spitsyn wrote:
> Currently, the `SetLocalXXX` minimal support for virtual threads is defined
> for a virtual threads suspended at a breakpoint or single step event. This
> enhancement is to extend to virtual threads suspended any event. This make
> `Se
On Thu, 25 May 2023 14:47:59 GMT, Serguei Spitsyn wrote:
> Currently, the `SetLocalXXX` minimal support for virtual threads is defined
> for a virtual threads suspended at a breakpoint or single step event. This
> enhancement is to extend to virtual threads suspended any event. This make
> `Se
On Thu, 25 May 2023 14:47:59 GMT, Serguei Spitsyn wrote:
> Currently, the `SetLocalXXX` minimal support for virtual threads is defined
> for a virtual threads suspended at a breakpoint or single step event. This
> enhancement is to extend to virtual threads suspended any event. This make
> `Se
On Fri, 26 May 2023 16:46:57 GMT, Chris Plummer wrote:
> Does our implementation just require that the virtual thread be suspended and
> mounted, but not necessarily at an event?
Yes.
>If so, do we have a test case for that?
The test `serviceability/jvmti/vthread/GetSetLocalTest` has such a t
On Thu, 25 May 2023 14:47:59 GMT, Serguei Spitsyn wrote:
> Currently, the `SetLocalXXX` minimal support for virtual threads is defined
> for a virtual threads suspended at a breakpoint or single step event. This
> enhancement is to extend to virtual threads suspended any event. This make
> `Se
Currently, the `SetLocalXXX` minimal support for virtual threads is defined for
a virtual threads suspended at a breakpoint or single step event. This
enhancement is to extend to virtual threads suspended any event. This make
`SetLocalXXX` spec consistent with specs of the `StopThread`, `PopFram
