Dear Serguei,
Here are the tests I have done:
Generally, the new version of jmap could work with the old
version of hotspot, the “parallel” option tooks no effect.
And the old verdion of jmap could work with the new version of hotspot without
parallel option, and t
Hi Lin,
The latest webrev looks good to me.
Just want to double check, how did you check no regressions are
introduced with your fix?
Thanks,
Serguei
On 8/11/20 08:22, linzang(臧琳) wrote:
Hi Serguei,
Thanks a lot for your advice. I agree your concern and will
take care of it in future.
Here is the latest webrev based on your comments: (delta is
just retrieving the usage(1))
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~lzang/jmap-8214535/8215624/w
Thanks David!
Coleen
On 8/10/20 10:07 PM, David Holmes wrote:
On 11/08/2020 10:48 am, Coleen Phillimore wrote:
Hi David, Thank you for reviewing.
On 8/10/20 8:04 PM, David Holmes wrote:
Hi Coleen,
This looks good to me too!
Were the changes in src/hotspot/share/utilities/macros.hpp just f
Hi David and Serguei,
> On 11/08/2020 3:21 am, serguei.spit...@oracle.com wrote:
> > Hi Richard and David,
> >
> > The implementation looks good to me.
> >
> > But I do not understand what the test is doing with all this counters
> > and recursions.
> >
> > For instance, these fragments:
> >
Hi Serguei,
> The implementation looks good to me.
Thanks.
> But I do not understand what the test is doing with all this counters and
> recursions.
The @comment gives an explanation: the target thread builds a stack as large as
possible to prolong the unsafe stackwalk. This is done by means o
Hi David,
thanks for looking at this. I've prepared a new webrev based on your feedback.
Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rrich/webrevs/8249293/webrev.3/
Delta: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rrich/webrevs/8249293/webrev.3.inc/
I'm answering your points inline below.
Thanks,
Richard.
> On 31/
