On Fri, 19 Nov 2021 02:29:33 GMT, Stuart Marks <sma...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>>> When the finalization is disabled, perhaps jcmd GC.finalizer_info should >>> just be made as a nop in the VM. >> >> Yes that is a trivial change to add. @stuart-marks I can provide the code. >> You can choose whether to include in this PR or else we can do a follow-up. > >> > When the finalization is disabled, perhaps jcmd GC.finalizer_info should >> > just be made as a nop in the VM. >> >> Yes that is a trivial change to add. @stuart-marks I can provide the code. >> You can choose whether to include in this PR or else we can do a follow-up. > > Seems simple enough. Is there any testing that needs to be done for this? > Does jcmd output require CSR review? I guess there would be a compatibility > issue if there were something that was parsing the output of jcmd. Or is it > solely intended to be read by humans? @stuart-marks No CSR needed for this as no output format is specified. Plus this command already has a simple text response when there are no finalizers queued. E.g. ``` > ../build/linux-x64-debug-finalization/images/jdk/bin/jcmd 27939 > GC.finalizer_info 27939: No instances waiting for finalization found so when finalization is disabled this just becomes: ``` > ../build/linux-x64-debug-finalization/images/jdk/bin/jcmd 28018 > GC.finalizer_info 28018: Finalization is disabled There is a test for this Dcmd, but it doesn't test the "nothing here" case so I don't think it is necessary to augment it for this case: `hotspot/jtreg/serviceability/dcmd/gc/FinalizerInfoTest.java` ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/6442
