On Tue, 5 Mar 2024 23:11:07 GMT, David Holmes <dhol...@openjdk.org> wrote:
> Okay so that is where the carrier and virtual thread states get back in sync, > and that is what is missing in the `RawMonitorWait` case. The proposed > fix/change to `is_interrupted` is what threw me as that is the wrong place to > make a change because it affects both cases. What is missing is an upcall > from `RawMonitorWait` to some Java code to do the same job as the > `Object.wait` Java code does. There was a duplication in the `Object.wait` which has been just removed. Please, see the incremental update 07: [Full](https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=18093&range=07) - [Incremental](https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=18093&range=06-07) ([923a3ff5](https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/18093/files/923a3ff580cfc4d0a68775e5f849b63c691b8eb3)). Now, both `Object.wait` and `RawMonitorWait` clear the interrupt status with the `JavaThread::is_interrupted()` only. ------------- PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/18093#issuecomment-1982105087
