On Thu, 12 Sep 2024 19:43:53 GMT, Kevin Walls <kev...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> Hello @kevinjwalls , and thank you for your review! I have attempted to >> address your concerns with my use of 'fatal()' by replacing with a message >> in the returned output and an assert(). >> >> I have also adjusted the spacing of the offset field in the output, but kept >> it for parity with the Linux version. > >> concerns with my use of 'fatal()' by replacing with a message in the >> returned output and an assert(). >> >> I have also adjusted the spacing of the offset field in the output, but kept >> it for parity with the Linux version. > > Thanks @stooke ! > > Thanks for making it non-fatal. > Printing a message on an unknown field will break the format? I don't want > to cause a great disturbance on this as it should "never happen" so this is > fine, or doing nothing and having the assert for debug builds. > > Re: offset column: I don't see an offset column in Linux, I see an rss column? @kevinjwalls > Re: offset column: I don't see an offset column in Linux, I see an rss column? You're right, I missed that. As far as I can tell, that information isn't available at that level for a memory segment. Are you okay with leaving the offset in? One bit of information lost without offset which memory block points to AllocationBase. ------------- PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/20597#issuecomment-2349089609
