On Mon, 5 Jun 2023 21:26:39 GMT, Serguei Spitsyn <sspit...@openjdk.org> wrote:
> Okay, I see you point. Unfortunately, I've always referred the platform > thread with an executed FJP schedular as a carrier thread. The term 'carrier' > with this meaning is everywhere in the JVMTI code. It looks very confusing to > call a thread to be a carrier thread only during some phases of its execution. Okay, I'm just pointing out that is_passive_carrier_thread is confusing looks a bit strange here as the is testing if a JavaThread is carrying a virtual thread oop - it's not testing if the thread is owned by the virtual thread scheduler. ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/14298#discussion_r1219888219
