On Tue, 20 Dec 2022 02:25:38 GMT, Chris Plummer <cjplum...@openjdk.org> wrote:

>> There are a few nsk debugger tests that pin multiple virtual threads to 
>> carrier threads when synchronizing. Sometime the default number of carrier 
>> threads (which equals the number of CPUs) is not enough, and the test 
>> deadlocks because virtual threads start to wait forever for an available 
>> carrier thread. This PR fixes this problem by using the 
>> `jdk.virtualThreadScheduler.parallelism` property to change the default 
>> number of carrier threads. I believe the largest number of carrier threads 
>> any test needs is 11, so I chose 15 just to be safe.
>> 
>> I had initially tried to fix each individual test by using the test support 
>> in `VThreadRunner.setParallism()`. The advantage of this was limiting the 
>> scope of the change to just a few tests, and also being able to specify the 
>> exact number of needed carrier threads. The disadvantage was having to make 
>> quite a few changes to quite a few tests, plus I had one troublesome test 
>> that was still failing, I believe because I didn't fully understand how many 
>> carrier threads it needed. Just giving every test 15 carrier threads in the 
>> end was a lot easier.
>
> Chris Plummer has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional 
> commit since the last revision:
> 
>   Better comments.

> Are saying that in addition to the changes in this PR I should also change 
> each of the tests to add a check to make sure parallelism is set high enough?

I was, but now I see the tests involved and the fact this problem is just an 
artifact of running those tests in virtual threads, then I really don't want to 
see those tests polluted with VT specific code. I know more now about the issue 
with pinning on monitor entry and not being able to increase parallelism for 
that case - but ideally that would indeed by the fix and I'll look into that 
some more.

But this fix is approved. Thanks.

-------------

Marked as reviewed by dholmes (Reviewer).

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/11735

Reply via email to