On Tue, 9 Jul 2024 04:43:59 GMT, Chris Plummer <cjplum...@openjdk.org> wrote:

> The test hits a breakpoint on thread2 with SUSPEND_EVENT_THREAD policy, so 
> only thread2 is suspended. It then does a vm.suspend(), which suspends all 
> threads and bumps the suspendCount of thread2 up to 2. It then does an 
> eventSet.resume(), which decrements the thread2 suspendCount to 1, so now all 
> threads are suspended with a suspendCount of 1. thread2 is then resumed and 
> we expect to hit the next thread2 breakpoint. The problem is that thread2 
> can't hit the breakpoint until the main thread has proceeded far enough, and 
> if the vm.suspend() that suspended the main thread happens too quickly, it 
> won't have proceeded far enough, so thread2 never hits the breakpoint.
> 
> Essentially we need a vm.resume() to allow the main thread to run, but we 
> need to do it in a way that does nullify part of what the test is testing 
> for. So in order to allow the vm.resume() but not subvert the intent of the 
> test, we first do a thread2.suspend() so the vm.resume() won't resume thread2.
> 
> Testing in progress: tier1 and tier5 svc testing

Read through and counted suspend/resumes on my fingers, seems good.

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

Marked as reviewed by kevinw (Reviewer).

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/20088#pullrequestreview-2165680314

Reply via email to