On Thu, 7 Mar 2024 06:45:01 GMT, David Holmes <dhol...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> Fixed as suggested by Alan. >> >>> Also need to think through if Object.wait will need to be changed as part >>> of this. >> >> Still need to look at this. > > Use of `ObjectLocker` here will introduce a new pinning point for Loom. We > have been removing as many uses of `ObjectLocker` as we can. I also think > this will need to be moved back to Java code when the pinning currently > inherent in calling `Object.wait` is addressed. Yes, and it may be that once Object.wait is implemented that we can remove the need to propagate the interrupt status (there are some TBDs here). I think the change here is okay for now but we still have the choice of limiting the change to just JVMTI RawMonitorWait. ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/18093#discussion_r1515760599
