On Wed, 6 Nov 2024 17:38:59 GMT, Patricio Chilano Mateo <pchilanom...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> Good work! I'll approve the GC related changes. >> >> There are some simplifications I think can be done in the ObjectMonitor >> layer, but nothing that should go into this PR. >> >> Similarly, (even if some of this is preexisting issues) I think that the way >> we describe the frames and the different frame transitions should be >> overhauled and made easier to understand. There are so many unnamed >> constants and adjustments which are spread out everywhere, which makes it >> hard to get an overview of exactly what happens and what interactions are >> related to what. You and Dean did a good job at simplifying and adding >> comments in this PR. But I hope this can be improved in the fututre. >> >> A small note on `_cont_fastpath`, as it is now also used for synchronised >> native method calls (native wrapper) maybe the comment should be updated to >> reflect this. >> >> // the sp of the oldest known interpreted/call_stub frame inside the >> // continuation that we know about > >> A small note on `_cont_fastpath`, as it is now also used for synchronised >> native method calls (native wrapper) maybe the comment should be updated to >> reflect this. >> >> ``` >> // the sp of the oldest known interpreted/call_stub frame inside the >> // continuation that we know about >> ``` >> > Updated comment. @pchilano `CancelTimerWithContention.java` test is failing on s390x with Timeout Error. One weird thing is that it only fails when I run whole tier1 test suite. But when ran independently test passes. One thing I would like to mention is that I ran test by **disabling** VMContinuations, as Vthreads are not yet supported by s390x. [CancelTimerWithContention.log](https://github.com/user-attachments/files/17658594/CancelTimerWithContention.log) ------------- PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/21565#issuecomment-2461640546
