On Sun, 19 Nov 2023 05:12:50 GMT, Serguei Spitsyn <sspit...@openjdk.org> wrote:

>> The handshakes support for virtual threads is needed to simplify the JVMTI 
>> implementation for virtual threads. There is a significant duplication in 
>> the JVMTI code to differentiate code intended to support platform, virtual 
>> threads or both. The handshakes are unified, so it is enough to define just 
>> one handshake for both platform and virtual thread.
>> At the low level, the JVMTI code supporting platform and virtual threads 
>> still can be different.
>> This implementation is based on the `JvmtiVTMSTransitionDisabler` class.
>> 
>> The internal API includes two new classes:
>>   - `JvmtiHandshake` and `JvmtiUnifiedHandshakeClosure`
>>   
>>   The `JvmtiUnifiedHandshakeClosure` defines two different callback 
>> functions: `do_thread()` and `do_vthread()`.
>> 
>> The first JVMTI functions are picked first to be converted to use the 
>> `JvmtiHandshake`:
>>  - `GetStackTrace`, `GetFrameCount`, `GetFrameLocation`, `NotifyFramePop`
>> 
>> To get the test results clean, the update also fixes the test issue:
>> [8318631](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8318631): 
>> GetStackTraceSuspendedStressTest.java failed with "check_jvmti_status: JVMTI 
>> function returned error: JVMTI_ERROR_THREAD_NOT_ALIVE (15)" 
>> 
>> Testing:
>>  - the mach5 tiers 1-6 are all passed
>
> Serguei Spitsyn has updated the pull request incrementally with one 
> additional commit since the last revision:
> 
>   review: remove java_lang_VirtualThread::NEW check from is_vthread_alive

Patricio and Alex, thank you a lot for review!

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

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/16460#issuecomment-1820429682

Reply via email to