On Mon, 7 Sep 2026 13:14:41 GMT, Jorn Vernee <[email protected]> wrote:

>> See the JBS issue for the extended problem description.
>> 
>> Native threads that were attached to the JVM through an FFM upcall are 
>> automatically detached from the VM when they join/terminate. However, if a 
>> native thread tries to terminate after the VM has exited without going 
>> through `DestroyJavaVm` (e.g. as a result of calling `System.exit`), they 
>> will block in `VM_Exit::block_if_vm_exited` inside `DetachCurrentThread`. 
>> This may happen for instance when they try to join after the JVM has exited 
>> in an `atexit` handler.
>> 
>> This patch adds a check before trying to detach the thread to see if the VM 
>> has exited and bails out if it has. This does not prevent issues as a result 
>> of a race between the VM exiting and the thread joining, but it does prevent 
>> issues in the more comment case where a thread simply outlives the VM.
>> 
>> ---------
>> - [X] I confirm that I make this contribution in accordance with the 
>> [OpenJDK Interim AI Policy](https://openjdk.org/legal/ai).
>
> Jorn Vernee has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional 
> commit since the last revision:
> 
>   Indentation
>   
>   Co-authored-by: David Holmes <[email protected]>

test/jdk/java/foreign/detachafterexit/libDetachAfterExit.cpp line 30:

> 28: 
> 29: static TestThread THREAD;
> 30: static volatile bool FLAG = false;

My C++ is really rusty, but I think `volatile` is much weaker in C++ compared 
to Java, so I wonder if there is actually any inter-thread synchronization 
going on here or if we need to use something stronger like `std::atomic<bool> 
FLAG(false); `?

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/32686#discussion_r3956669914

Reply via email to