On Wed, 1 May 2024 22:40:02 GMT, Serguei Spitsyn <sspit...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> src/hotspot/share/prims/jvmti.xml line 8266: >> >>> 8264: <description> >>> 8265: The number of platform threads waiting to own this >>> monitor, >>> 8266: or <code>0</code> if the monitor is owned by a virtual >>> thread or not owned >> >> Be consistent with above descriptions. They don't say "if the monitor is >> owned by". They say "if owned by". > > Good suggestion, thanks. But it is more "incorrect". It should say "is waited > by" instead of "is owned by": > > The number of platform threads waiting to own this monitor, or > <code>0</code> > if is waited by virtual threads only or no threads are waiting > ``` > Are you okay with this correction? > Or maybe we should say: > > The number of platform threads waiting to own this monitor, or > <code>0</code> > if virtual threads only are waiting or no threads are waiting Copy and paste issue on my part. I would use "if only virtual threads". >> test/hotspot/jtreg/vmTestbase/nsk/jvmti/GetObjectMonitorUsage/objmonusage001.java >> line 65: >> >>> 63: } >>> 64: // Virtual threads are not supported by the >>> GetObjectMonitorUsage. Correct >>> 65: // the expected values if the test is executed with >>> MainWrapper=virtual. >> >> "MainWrapper" is not the proper terminology any more. It's "Test Thread >> Factory" (JTREG_TEST_THREAD_FACTORY=Virtual). > > Good suggestion, thanks. Then I'd suggest this: > > // Virtual threads are not supported by the GetObjectMonitorUsage. > // Correct the expected values if the test is executed with the > // JTREG_TEST_THREAD_FACTORY=Virtual. You can drop "the" from "with the JTREG_TEST_THREAD_FACTORY=Virtual" ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19030#discussion_r1586913098 PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19030#discussion_r1586913936
