Re: RFR: 8229012: When single stepping, the debug agent can cause the thread to remain in interpreter mode after single stepping completes [v2]

2025-01-24 Thread Chris Plummer
On Fri, 24 Jan 2025 20:03:12 GMT, Chris Plummer wrote: >> It's gone. Are you sure you are looking at the latest sources? > > Hmm. Now it looks like it is there. I see now. I got rid one for resuming but not the one for suspending. It should be gone now. - PR Review Comment: https:

Re: RFR: 8229012: When single stepping, the debug agent can cause the thread to remain in interpreter mode after single stepping completes [v2]

2025-01-24 Thread Chris Plummer
On Fri, 24 Jan 2025 20:02:23 GMT, Chris Plummer wrote: >> src/jdk.jdwp.agent/share/native/libjdwp/stepControl.c line 913: >> >>> 911: >>> 912: if (needsSuspending) { >>> 913: tty_message("clearStep: suspending thread"); >> >> Nit: This `tty_message()` is still here. Should

Re: RFR: 8348239: SA does not know about DeoptimizeObjectsALotThread

2025-01-24 Thread Chris Plummer
On Fri, 24 Jan 2025 10:19:30 GMT, Kevin Walls wrote: >> If you run hotspot with -XX:+DeoptimizeObjectsALot, it will create one or >> more DeoptimizeObjectsALotThread threads. This is one of many JavaThread >> subclasses that SA needs to know about, but in this case it does not. When >> SA trie

Re: RFR: 8229012: When single stepping, the debug agent can cause the thread to remain in interpreter mode after single stepping completes [v3]

2025-01-24 Thread Chris Plummer
> When doing a STEP_OVER, the debug agent does a NotifyFramePop() on the > current frame as a safety net. After the STEP_OVER completes, the > NotifyFramePop() is usually still in place. This keeps the thread in > interp_only mode, which hurts performance. JVMTI has added a new > ClearAllFrame

Re: RFR: 8229012: When single stepping, the debug agent can cause the thread to remain in interpreter mode after single stepping completes [v2]

2025-01-24 Thread Serguei Spitsyn
On Thu, 23 Jan 2025 16:50:07 GMT, Chris Plummer wrote: >> When doing a STEP_OVER, the debug agent does a NotifyFramePop() on the >> current frame as a safety net. After the STEP_OVER completes, the >> NotifyFramePop() is usually still in place. This keeps the thread in >> interp_only mode, wh

Re: RFR: 8344976: Remove the jmx.invoke.getters compatibility property [v2]

2025-01-24 Thread Kevin Walls
On Fri, 24 Jan 2025 11:45:56 GMT, Serguei Spitsyn wrote: >> Kevin Walls has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional >> commit since the last revision: >> >> (C) > > test/jdk/javax/management/Introspector/InvokeGettersTest.java line 2: > >> 1: /* >> 2: * Copyright (c) 2005

Re: RFR: 8344976: Remove the jmx.invoke.getters compatibility property [v2]

2025-01-24 Thread Kevin Walls
> The System Property "jmx.invoke.getters" was added in > [JDK-4949203](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-4949203) to optionally be > compatible with a time before JDK-6, when calling invoke on getters and > setters was permitted. > > It should be removed. Kevin Walls has updated the pull re

RFR: 8348567: [ASAN] Memory access partially overflows by NativeCallStack

2025-01-24 Thread SendaoYan
Hi all, This PR fix a undefined behaviour in 'CollisionsReceiveDifferentIndexes' testcase locate in 'test/hotspot/gtest/nmt/test_nmt_nativecallstackstorage.cpp' file when call `NativeCallStack::NativeCallStack` function. Before this PR, 'CollisionsReceiveDifferentIndexes' test allocate 4 type v

Re: RFR: 8344976: Remove the jmx.invoke.getters compatibility property

2025-01-24 Thread Serguei Spitsyn
On Wed, 15 Jan 2025 12:15:25 GMT, Kevin Walls wrote: > The System Property "jmx.invoke.getters" was added in > [JDK-4949203](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-4949203) to optionally be > compatible with a time before JDK-6, when calling invoke on getters and > setters was permitted. > > It

Re: RFR: 8347123: Add missing @serial tags to other modules [v2]

2025-01-24 Thread Hannes Wallnöfer
> Please review a doc-only change to mostly add missing `@serial` javadoc tags. > This is a sub-task of [JDK-8286931] to allow us to re-enable the javadoc > `-serialwarn` option in the JDK doc build, which has been disabled since JDK > 19. > > [JDK-8286931]: https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-

Re: RFR: 8348239: SA does not know about DeoptimizeObjectsALotThread [v2]

2025-01-24 Thread Chris Plummer
> If you run hotspot with -XX:+DeoptimizeObjectsALot, it will create one or > more DeoptimizeObjectsALotThread threads. This is one of many JavaThread > subclasses that SA needs to know about, but in this case it does not. When SA > tries to create a mirror of one of these threads, it fails with

Re: RFR: 8348239: SA does not know about DeoptimizeObjectsALotThread [v2]

2025-01-24 Thread Chris Plummer
On Fri, 24 Jan 2025 20:13:29 GMT, Chris Plummer wrote: >> src/jdk.hotspot.agent/share/classes/sun/jvm/hotspot/runtime/Threads.java >> line 168: >> >>> 166: JvmtiAgentThread, NotificationThread, MonitorDeflationThread, >>> 167: StringDedupThread, AttachListenerThread, >>> Deoptimize

Re: RFR: 8229012: When single stepping, the debug agent can cause the thread to remain in interpreter mode after single stepping completes [v2]

2025-01-24 Thread Chris Plummer
On Fri, 24 Jan 2025 11:52:04 GMT, Serguei Spitsyn wrote: >> Chris Plummer has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional >> commit since the last revision: >> >> Some minor cleanup. > > src/jdk.jdwp.agent/share/native/libjdwp/stepControl.c line 913: > >> 911: >> 912:

Re: RFR: 8344976: Remove the jmx.invoke.getters compatibility property [v2]

2025-01-24 Thread Chris Plummer
On Fri, 24 Jan 2025 11:55:23 GMT, Kevin Walls wrote: >> The System Property "jmx.invoke.getters" was added in >> [JDK-4949203](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-4949203) to optionally be >> compatible with a time before JDK-6, when calling invoke on getters and >> setters was permitted. >>

Integrated: 8348265: RMIConnectionImpl: Remove Subject.callAs on MarshalledObject

2025-01-24 Thread Kevin Walls
On Wed, 22 Jan 2025 10:05:11 GMT, Kevin Walls wrote: > Redundant after Security Manager removal, remove the Subject.callAs() call on > a MashalledObject.cast(). > Previously, a Policy could possibly have restricted permissable classes > available to the cast(). > > Nothing in our tests fails i

Re: RFR: 8348239: SA does not know about DeoptimizeObjectsALotThread

2025-01-24 Thread Kevin Walls
On Thu, 23 Jan 2025 20:15:35 GMT, Chris Plummer wrote: > If you run hotspot with -XX:+DeoptimizeObjectsALot, it will create one or > more DeoptimizeObjectsALotThread threads. This is one of many JavaThread > subclasses that SA needs to know about, but in this case it does not. When SA > tries

Re: RFR: 8347123: Add missing @serial tags to other modules [v2]

2025-01-24 Thread Hannes Wallnöfer
On Thu, 23 Jan 2025 16:16:03 GMT, Hannes Wallnöfer wrote: >> There's not a great number of "good" examples of this in the JDK, so >> probably OK except it >> seems like most cases will do it like a normal javadoc method so you'd want >> an @param tag too. >> >> note : this is a desktop class,

Re: RFR: 8348239: SA does not know about DeoptimizeObjectsALotThread [v2]

2025-01-24 Thread Dean Long
On Fri, 24 Jan 2025 23:23:43 GMT, Chris Plummer wrote: > I don't see how that relates to this change. It sounds more like a general > suggestion to overhaul of how vmStructs is implemented. It relates because if something like that was available then we could register types that are local to a

Re: RFR: 8348239: SA does not know about DeoptimizeObjectsALotThread [v2]

2025-01-24 Thread Chris Plummer
On Fri, 24 Jan 2025 22:52:19 GMT, Dean Long wrote: > > > Overall the changes seem fine, however it would be nice if the > > > vmStructs.cpp registration mechanism was modular and extensible, instead > > > of monolithic. That would make it easier to register private types, or > > > even types o

Re: RFR: 8348239: SA does not know about DeoptimizeObjectsALotThread [v2]

2025-01-24 Thread Dean Long
On Thu, 23 Jan 2025 22:30:48 GMT, Chris Plummer wrote: > > Overall the changes seem fine, however it would be nice if the > > vmStructs.cpp registration mechanism was modular and extensible, instead of > > monolithic. That would make it easier to register private types, or even > > types outsi

Re: RFR: 8348239: SA does not know about DeoptimizeObjectsALotThread [v2]

2025-01-24 Thread Kevin Walls
On Fri, 24 Jan 2025 20:22:07 GMT, Chris Plummer wrote: >> If you run hotspot with -XX:+DeoptimizeObjectsALot, it will create one or >> more DeoptimizeObjectsALotThread threads. This is one of many JavaThread >> subclasses that SA needs to know about, but in this case it does not. When >> SA tr

Re: RFR: 8348239: SA does not know about DeoptimizeObjectsALotThread

2025-01-24 Thread Kevin Walls
On Thu, 23 Jan 2025 20:15:35 GMT, Chris Plummer wrote: > If you run hotspot with -XX:+DeoptimizeObjectsALot, it will create one or > more DeoptimizeObjectsALotThread threads. This is one of many JavaThread > subclasses that SA needs to know about, but in this case it does not. When SA > tries

Re: RFR: 8343191: Cgroup v1 subsystem fails to set subsystem path [v11]

2025-01-24 Thread Sergey Chernyshev
On Thu, 12 Dec 2024 01:11:33 GMT, Sergey Chernyshev wrote: >> Cgroup V1 subsustem fails to initialize mounted controllers properly in >> certain cases, that may lead to controllers left undetected/inactive. We >> observed the behavior in CloudFoundry deployments, it affects also host >> syste

Re: RFR: 8344976: Remove the jmx.invoke.getters compatibility property [v2]

2025-01-24 Thread Kevin Walls
On Fri, 24 Jan 2025 20:31:01 GMT, Chris Plummer wrote: >> Kevin Walls has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional >> commit since the last revision: >> >> (C) > > src/java.management/share/classes/com/sun/jmx/mbeanserver/PerInterface.java > line 149: > >> 147: