On Fri, 17 Nov 2023 02:10:50 GMT, Patricio Chilano Mateo <pchilanom...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> If it is a part of the `JvmtiEnvBase::is_vthread_alive()` then it is racy >> for mounted virtual threads. >> It is not racy for unmounted virtual threads. > > So we should only see that a continuation is done for an unmounted vthread. > The last place where we could see a mounted vthread is at notifyJvmtiEnd(), > blocked in start_VTMS_transition(), but the continuation is not marked done > yet. > Also I realize the window for the problematic case I mentioned starts even > earlier at notifyJvmtiEnd(), not notifyJvmtiUnmount(), because blocking due > to JvmtiVTMSTransitionDisabler happens in start_VTMS_transition() not > finish_VTMS_transition(). Once the vthread executed notifyJvmtiEnd() any > JvmtiVTMSTransitionDisabler that happens afterwards will fall into this case. > So maybe the first sentence of the comment should instead be: "The vthread > could have already executed the last unmount but might not have changed state > to TERMINATED yet." Thank you. Now I see that `done` is set to `true` during an unmount transition. So, I'm convinced to move the check for `jdk_internal_vm_Continuation::done(cont)` to `JvmtiEnvBase::is_vthread_alive()`. ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/16460#discussion_r1396695782
