On Mon, 13 Jun 2022 17:02:44 GMT, Coleen Phillimore wrote:
> Use a native JVM monitor and state for mutual exclusion for class linking and
> initialization. See CR for more details.
> Tested with tier1-8. tiers 1-4 on Oracle supported platforms and 5-8 on
> linux-x64-debug. There isn't any
On Tue, 7 Jun 2022 12:42:05 GMT, Johan Sjölén wrote:
>> Please review this PR for fixing JDK-8287281.
>>
>> If a thread is handshake safe we immediately execute the closure, instead of
>> going through the regular Handshake process.
>>
>> Finally: Should `VirtualThreadGetThreadClosure` and
On Fri, 3 Jun 2022 09:45:31 GMT, Johan Sjölén wrote:
>> Please review this PR for fixing JDK-8287281.
>>
>> I chose a different solution than the one suggested. Looking at all callers
>> of `Handshake::execute`, it seems that only one depends on `target ==
>> current`. The rest special case
On Thu, 2 Jun 2022 14:38:31 GMT, Aleksey Shipilev wrote:
> Trivial, or? I would like to have this integrated sooner to clean up our
> testing.
Ship it under trivial, thanks.
-
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/8990
On Thu, 2 Jun 2022 13:47:23 GMT, Johan Sjölén wrote:
> Please review this PR for fixing JDK-8287281.
>
> I chose a different solution than the one suggested. Looking at all callers
> of `Handshake::execute`, it seems that only one depends on `target ==
> current`. The rest special case that
On Thu, 2 Jun 2022 09:54:31 GMT, Aleksey Shipilev wrote:
> [JDK-8287496](https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8287496) brought the
> alternative Loom implementation that can be used by ports as the fallback.
> That fallback does not support JVMTI entirely, so lots of tests fail. Some
>
On Tue, 31 May 2022 15:39:39 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
>> This patch adds an alternative virtual thread implementation where each
>> virtual thread is backed by an OS thread. It doesn't scale but it can be
>> used by ports that don't have continuations support in the VM. Aside from
>>
On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 17:27:35 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
>> This is the implementation of JEP 425: Virtual Threads (Preview); TBD which
>> JDK version to target.
>>
>> We will refresh this PR periodically to pick up changes and fixes from the
>> loom repo.
>>
>> Most of the new mechanisms in
On Fri, 5 Nov 2021 23:42:07 GMT, Daniel D. Daugherty wrote:
>> A fix to reduce ThreadsListHandle overhead in relation to handshakes and
>> we add sanity checks for ThreadsListHandles higher in the call stack.
>>
>> This fix was tested with Mach5 Tier[1-8]; Tier8 is still running.
>
> Daniel D.
On Wed, 3 Nov 2021 01:19:21 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
>> Daniel D. Daugherty has updated the pull request incrementally with one
>> additional commit since the last revision:
>>
>> 8249004.cr2.patch
>
> src/hotspot/share/runtime/handshake.cpp line 350:
>
>> 348: }
>> 349:
>> 350: void
On Tue, 2 Nov 2021 17:26:41 GMT, Daniel D. Daugherty wrote:
>> A fix to reduce ThreadsListHandle overhead in relation to handshakes and
>> we add sanity checks for ThreadsListHandles higher in the call stack.
>>
>> This fix was tested with Mach5 Tier[1-8]; Tier8 is still running.
>
> Daniel D.
On Wed, 2 Jun 2021 10:08:02 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
> Part of the JEP-306 integration wasn't tested past tier 3 and missed some
> changes needed in the vmTestbase/nsk tests. The crux of the changes for
> JEP-306 are that the strictfp modifier has no affect any more (all fp math is
> strict)
On Fri, 28 May 2021 19:40:00 GMT, Daniel D. Daugherty
wrote:
> A trivial fix to cleanup Threads_lock comments in JVM/TI function headers.
>
> Also remove errant text added by the jframeID XSL template code:
>
>
> // java_thread - unchecked
> // depth - pre-checked as non-negative
>
>
> The
On Wed, 5 May 2021 08:11:04 GMT, Robbin Ehn wrote:
> Please consider this change which removes the manual transitions to blocked.
> This adds a preprocess template/functor which is executed in the destructor
> of 'ThreadBlockInVM' if we are going to do any processing.
> This gi
On Wed, 26 May 2021 14:45:07 GMT, Daniel D. Daugherty
wrote:
> Thumbs up.
>
> Reviewed the incremental between v05 -> v06. Looks good.
Thanks!
-
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/3875
On Wed, 26 May 2021 15:18:43 GMT, Patricio Chilano Mateo
wrote:
>> I need to run the InFlightMutexRelease constructor before I can run the
>> ThreadBlockInVMPreprocess constructor.
>
> Just for consistency, shouldn't we just use ThreadBlockInVMPreprocess in
> mutex.cpp as we are using it in
On Tue, 25 May 2021 22:59:55 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
> Nothing further from me.
>
> Thanks,
> David
Thank you David!
-
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/3875
On Tue, 25 May 2021 13:04:46 GMT, Richard Reingruber wrote:
> Still looks good to me.
>
> Cheer's, Richard.
Thank you!
-
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/3875
On Mon, 24 May 2021 18:12:00 GMT, Daniel D. Daugherty
wrote:
> Thumbs up.
>
> I just have some minor questions about a couple of the details.
> Nothing blocking.
Thanks Dan!
-
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/3875
each other have little
> additional performance impact on contemporary hardware)
>
> Passes t1-t7 and manual stressing relevant test groups.
Robbin Ehn has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge
or a rebase. The incremental webrev excludes the unrelated changes brough
On Mon, 24 May 2021 17:57:44 GMT, Daniel D. Daugherty
wrote:
>> Robbin Ehn has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Final fixes: last famous words
>
> src/hotspot/share/runtime/objectMonitor.cpp
On Mon, 24 May 2021 17:44:33 GMT, Daniel D. Daugherty
wrote:
>> Robbin Ehn has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Final fixes: last famous words
>
> src/hotspot/share/runtime/interfaceSupport.
On Mon, 24 May 2021 16:28:15 GMT, Daniel D. Daugherty
wrote:
>> Robbin Ehn has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Final fixes: last famous words
>
> src/hotspot/share/prims/jvmtiRawMonitor.cp
On Mon, 24 May 2021 02:29:23 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
>> Okay I will file a RFE to get the memory ordering semantics of
>> set_thread_state cleaned up so we don't have any missing barriers where
>> needed, nor redundant barriers.
>>
>> Note that the expectation is that we write the code for
On Fri, 21 May 2021 09:41:10 GMT, Robbin Ehn wrote:
>> Please consider this change which removes the manual transitions to blocked.
>> This adds a preprocess template/functor which is executed in the destructor
>> of 'ThreadBlockInVM' if we are going to do any processing.
>
each other have little
> additional performance impact on contemporary hardware)
>
> Passes t1-t7 and manual stressing relevant test groups.
Robbin Ehn has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
commit since the last revision:
Final fixes: last famous words
--
On Thu, 20 May 2021 21:51:31 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
>> Robbin Ehn has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
>> merge or a rebase. The incremental webrev excludes the unrelated changes
>> brought in by the merge/rebase. The pull request contains seven addi
On Wed, 19 May 2021 07:26:14 GMT, Robbin Ehn wrote:
>> Please consider this change which removes the manual transitions to blocked.
>> This adds a preprocess template/functor which is executed in the destructor
>> of 'ThreadBlockInVM' if we are going to do any processing.
>
each other have little
> additional performance impact on contemporary hardware)
>
> Passes t1-t7 and manual stressing relevant test groups.
Robbin Ehn has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge
or a rebase. The incremental webrev excludes the unrelated changes
On Thu, 20 May 2021 07:07:20 GMT, Robbin Ehn wrote:
>> src/hotspot/share/prims/jvmtiRawMonitor.cpp line 382:
>>
>>> 380:
>>> 381: _recursions = 0;
>>> 382: ret = simple_wait(self, millis);
>>
>> IMHO the guarantee at L379 is red
On Thu, 20 May 2021 06:03:28 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
>> Robbin Ehn has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
>> merge or a rebase. The incremental webrev excludes the unrelated changes
>> brought in by the merge/rebase. The pull request contains five addi
On Wed, 19 May 2021 07:22:06 GMT, Robbin Ehn wrote:
> Hi Robbin,
>
> Sorry for the delay in getting through this.
>
> Overall approach looks good. I have a few queries below and some requested
> naming changes to make things clearer.
>
> Thanks,
> David
Thanks
On Thu, 20 May 2021 05:14:43 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
>> Robbin Ehn has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
>> merge or a rebase. The incremental webrev excludes the unrelated changes
>> brought in by the merge/rebase. The pull request contains five addi
On Wed, 19 May 2021 14:25:41 GMT, Richard Reingruber wrote:
> Just one more, rather unimportant comment...
>
> Either way: LGTM!
>
> Thanks, Richard.
Thanks!
> src/hotspot/share/prims/jvmtiRawMonitor.cpp line 382:
>
>> 380:
>> 381: _recursions = 0;
>> 382: ret = simple_wait(self,
On Fri, 14 May 2021 18:02:12 GMT, Richard Reingruber wrote:
> Hi Robbin,
>
> there seem to be issues in the jvmtiRawMonitor part of the change. Besides
> that it looks good.
>
> Cheers, Richard.
Thanks and thanks for finding the two issues, updated!
-
PR:
On Thu, 13 May 2021 06:04:19 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
> Hi Robbin,
>
> Sorry for the delay in getting through this.
>
> Overall approach looks good. I have a few queries below and some requested
> naming changes to make things clearer.
>
> Thanks,
> David
Thanks for looking at, update after
On Wed, 12 May 2021 08:04:47 GMT, Robbin Ehn wrote:
>> Please consider this change which removes the manual transitions to blocked.
>> This adds a preprocess template/functor which is executed in the destructor
>> of 'ThreadBlockInVM' if we are going to do any processing.
>
each other have little
> additional performance impact on contemporary hardware)
>
> Passes t1-t7 and manual stressing relevant test groups.
Robbin Ehn has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge
or a rebase. The incremental webrev excludes the unrelated change
On Mon, 17 May 2021 09:32:23 GMT, Richard Reingruber wrote:
>> Robbin Ehn has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Fixes for Dan
>
> src/hotspot/share/prims/jvmtiRawM
On Thu, 13 May 2021 05:27:42 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
>> Robbin Ehn has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Fixes for Dan
>
> src/hotspot/share/runtime/interfaceSupport.inline.hpp line 207:
On Thu, 13 May 2021 05:57:55 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
>> Robbin Ehn has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Fixes for Dan
>
> src/hotspot/share/runtime/objectMonitor.cpp line 435:
>
>&g
On Mon, 17 May 2021 01:36:05 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
>> src/hotspot/share/prims/jvmtiRawMonitor.cpp line 386:
>>
>>> 384: _waiters++;
>>> 385: ret = simple_wait(self, millis);
>>> 386: _waiters--;
>>
>> We don't own the monitor yet so you cannot modify `_waiters` here.
>> Any
On Fri, 14 May 2021 09:50:56 GMT, Richard Reingruber wrote:
>> Robbin Ehn has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Fixes for Dan
>
> src/hotspot/share/prims/jvmtiRawMonitor.cpp line 47:
>
>>
On Thu, 13 May 2021 05:46:59 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
>> Robbin Ehn has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Fixes for Dan
>
> src/hotspot/share/runtime/interfaceSupport.inline.hpp line 277:
&g
On Thu, 13 May 2021 05:24:03 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
>> Robbin Ehn has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Fixes for Dan
>
> src/hotspot/share/prims/jvmtiRawMonitor.hpp line 96:
On Thu, 13 May 2021 05:22:51 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
>> Robbin Ehn has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Fixes for Dan
>
> src/hotspot/share/prims/jvmtiRawMonitor.hpp line 48:
>
>> 46
On Wed, 12 May 2021 08:27:33 GMT, Richard Reingruber wrote:
> Hi Robbin,
>
> I haven't found the time for a proper review yet but I've experimented a
> little bit with lambdas. I could not make it work because g++ created
> references to ::new which isn't allowed.
>
> Thanks, Richard.
Hi
each other have little
> additional performance impact on contemporary hardware)
>
> Passes t1-t7 and manual stressing relevant test groups.
Robbin Ehn has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
commit since the last revision:
Fixes for Dan
--
each other have little
> additional performance impact on contemporary hardware)
>
> Passes t1-t7 and manual stressing relevant test groups.
Robbin Ehn has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge
or a rebase. The incremental webrev excludes the unrelated chang
Please consider this change which removes the manual transitions to blocked.
This adds a preprocess template/functor which is executed in the destructor of
'ThreadBlockInVM' if we are going to do any processing.
This gives us a way to backout of the object/raw monitor before suspend or
other
On Wed, 21 Apr 2021 21:22:50 GMT, Daniel D. Daugherty
wrote:
>> I'm updating the runtime/Thread/SuspendAtExit.java test:
>>
>> - switch from java.lang.Thread.suspend() to JVM/TI SuspendThread()
>> - switch from java.lang.Thread.resume() to JVM/TI ResumeThread()
>> - switch from counter-based
On Thu, 25 Mar 2021 10:56:23 GMT, Robbin Ehn wrote:
> A suspend request is done by handshaking thread target thread(s). When
> executing the handshake operation we know the target mutator thread is in a
> dormant state (as in safepoint safe state). We have a guarantee that it will
On Thu, 22 Apr 2021 09:36:26 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
> Approving again for good measure. :)
Thank you!
-
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/3191
On Wed, 21 Apr 2021 13:25:53 GMT, Richard Reingruber wrote:
> I've followed the discussion and the increments. Still looks very good to me
Thank you!
-
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/3191
On Wed, 21 Apr 2021 13:17:02 GMT, Daniel D. Daugherty
wrote:
> Reviewed the v11 and v12 incrementals.
> Still a thumbs up.
Thank you!
-
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/3191
On Wed, 21 Apr 2021 07:59:09 GMT, Robbin Ehn wrote:
>> A suspend request is done by handshaking thread target thread(s). When
>> executing the handshake operation we know the target mutator thread is in a
>> dormant state (as in safepoint safe state). We have a guarantee that
from
> @dcubed-ojdk, @pchilano, @coleenp.
> (Pre-review comments here:
> https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/2625)
>
>
> Testing t1-t8, nsk_jdi/nsk_jvmti/jdk_jdi/tck, KS24, RunThese and
> combinations like running with -XX:ZCollectionInterval=0.01 -
> XX:ZFragmentation
On Tue, 20 Apr 2021 18:09:07 GMT, Patricio Chilano Mateo
wrote:
> Latest version LGTM!
>
> Thanks,
> Patricio
Thanks
-
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/3191
On Wed, 21 Apr 2021 04:32:36 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
> Looks good.
Thanks
-
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/3191
On Wed, 21 Apr 2021 04:39:35 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
>> Borrowing the HandshakeState lock does create an artificial coupling here.
>> I'd prefer to see this API in a more natural place with friendship used to
>> access the mechanism as needed. Future cleanup though.
>
> Also I think you'd
On Mon, 19 Apr 2021 19:15:18 GMT, Daniel D. Daugherty
wrote:
> I'm updating the runtime/Thread/SuspendAtExit.java test:
>
> - switch from java.lang.Thread.suspend() to JVM/TI SuspendThread()
> - switch from java.lang.Thread.resume() to JVM/TI ResumeThread()
> - switch from counter-based to
On Mon, 19 Apr 2021 18:19:05 GMT, Patricio Chilano Mateo
wrote:
>> Is this worth a comment above the `break_tty_lock_for_safepoint()` call?
>
> I also thought we could remove this since we are already releasing it in the
> ThreadInVMForHandshake constructor above.
Yes, sorry, removed.
On Mon, 19 Apr 2021 08:22:35 GMT, Robbin Ehn wrote:
>> A suspend request is done by handshaking thread target thread(s). When
>> executing the handshake operation we know the target mutator thread is in a
>> dormant state (as in safepoint safe state). We have a guarantee that
from
> @dcubed-ojdk, @pchilano, @coleenp.
> (Pre-review comments here:
> https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/2625)
>
>
> Testing t1-t8, nsk_jdi/nsk_jvmti/jdk_jdi/tck, KS24, RunThese and
> combinations like running with -XX:ZCollectionInterval=0.01 -
> XX:ZFragmentationLi
On Mon, 19 Apr 2021 08:22:35 GMT, Robbin Ehn wrote:
>> A suspend request is done by handshaking thread target thread(s). When
>> executing the handshake operation we know the target mutator thread is in a
>> dormant state (as in safepoint safe state). We have a guarantee that
from
> @dcubed-ojdk, @pchilano, @coleenp.
> (Pre-review comments here:
> https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/2625)
>
>
> Testing t1-t8, nsk_jdi/nsk_jvmti/jdk_jdi/tck, KS24, RunThese and
> combinations like running with -XX:ZCollectionInterval=0.01 -
> XX:ZFragmentation
from
> @dcubed-ojdk, @pchilano, @coleenp.
> (Pre-review comments here:
> https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/2625)
>
>
> Testing t1-t8, nsk_jdi/nsk_jvmti/jdk_jdi/tck, KS24, RunThese and
> combinations like running with -XX:ZCollectionInterval=0.01 -
> X
On Mon, 19 Apr 2021 06:07:54 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
>> Robbin Ehn has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Fixed nits
>
> src/jdk.hotspot.agent/share/classes/sun/jvm/hotspot/runtime/Thread.java l
On Mon, 19 Apr 2021 04:47:33 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
>> Robbin Ehn has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Fixed nits
>
> src/hotspot/share/runtime/mutex.hpp line 70:
>
>> 68:
On Mon, 19 Apr 2021 04:43:15 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
>> Robbin Ehn has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Fixed nits
>
> src/hotspot/share/runtime/handshake.hpp line 157:
>
>> 155: Thr
On Mon, 19 Apr 2021 04:34:00 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
>> Robbin Ehn has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Fixed nits
>
> src/hotspot/share/runtime/handshake.hpp line 134:
>
>> 132
On Mon, 19 Apr 2021 04:19:28 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
>> Robbin Ehn has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Fixed nits
>
> src/hotspot/share/runtime/handshake.cpp line 630:
>
>> 62
On Thu, 15 Apr 2021 17:02:22 GMT, Daniel D. Daugherty
wrote:
> Reviewed the v08 incremental. Still thumbs up.
Thanks!
-
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/3191
from
> @dcubed-ojdk, @pchilano, @coleenp.
> (Pre-review comments here:
> https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/2625)
>
>
> Testing t1-t8, nsk_jdi/nsk_jvmti/jdk_jdi/tck, KS24, RunThese and
> combinations like running with -XX:ZCollectionInterval=0.01 -
> XX:ZFragmentation
On Thu, 15 Apr 2021 22:22:53 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
> Only nits on the incremental.
>
> Like Dan I need to re-examine the complete set of changes to see if anything
> else sticks out (other than the non-encapsulation of the state changes around
> locking/unlocking when suspended).
>
>
On Wed, 14 Apr 2021 16:30:56 GMT, Daniel D. Daugherty
wrote:
>> Robbin Ehn has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Fixed flag undef dep + spelling error
>
> src/hotspot/share/runtime/objectM
On Wed, 14 Apr 2021 16:27:10 GMT, Daniel D. Daugherty
wrote:
>> Robbin Ehn has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
>> merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains 13 commits:
>>
>> - Merge branch 'master' into SuspendInHandshake
>> - R
On Wed, 14 Apr 2021 23:11:56 GMT, Serguei Spitsyn wrote:
> It looks good. I do not see any serviceability related related issues but
> posted some nits.
> Thanks,
> Serguei
Thank you Serguei!
> src/hotspot/share/prims/jvmtiEnv.cpp line 952:
>
>> 950: if
from
> @dcubed-ojdk, @pchilano, @coleenp.
> (Pre-review comments here:
> https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/2625)
>
>
> Testing t1-t8, nsk_jdi/nsk_jvmti/jdk_jdi/tck, KS24, RunThese and
> combinations like running with -XX:ZCollectionInterval=0.01 -
> XX:ZFragmentationL
On Wed, 14 Apr 2021 16:05:39 GMT, Daniel D. Daugherty
wrote:
>> Robbin Ehn has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Fixed flag undef dep + spelling error
>
> src/hotspot/share/runtime/handshake.hpp
On Fri, 9 Apr 2021 15:39:08 GMT, Daniel D. Daugherty wrote:
>> Robbin Ehn has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
>> merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains six commits:
>>
>> - White space fixes
>> - Merge branch 'master' into S
On Wed, 14 Apr 2021 15:31:21 GMT, Daniel D. Daugherty
wrote:
> Reviewed v07 incremental. Still looks good.
Thank you!
-
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/3191
On Tue, 13 Apr 2021 07:44:58 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
> Could be a neat use of a lambda "on_suspension_do" ...
If no one else picks that up, I'll give it go after this :)
-
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/3191
On Wed, 14 Apr 2021 02:15:07 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
> Latest updates look good - thanks.
>
> David
Thank you!
-
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/3191
On Tue, 13 Apr 2021 07:44:58 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
> Could be a neat use of a lambda "on_suspension_do" ...
If no one else picks that up, I'll give it go after this :)
-
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/3191
On Tue, 13 Apr 2021 07:44:58 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
> Could be a neat use of a lambda "on_suspension_do" ...
If no one else picks that up, I'll give it go after this :)
-
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/3191
from
> @dcubed-ojdk, @pchilano, @coleenp.
> (Pre-review comments here:
> https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/2625)
>
>
> Testing t1-t8, nsk_jdi/nsk_jvmti/jdk_jdi/tck, KS24, RunThese and
> combinations like running with -XX:ZCollectionInterval=0.01 -
> XX:ZFragment
On Tue, 13 Apr 2021 07:44:58 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
> Could be a neat use of a lambda "on_suspension_do" ...
If no one else picks that up, I'll give it go after this :)
-
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/3191
On Tue, 13 Apr 2021 07:44:58 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
> Could be a neat use of a lambda "on_suspension_do" ...
If no one else picks that up, I'll give it go after this :)
-
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/3191
On Tue, 13 Apr 2021 16:49:53 GMT, Daniel D. Daugherty
wrote:
>> Robbin Ehn has updated the pull request incrementally with two additional
>> commits since the last revision:
>>
>> - Obsolete unused flags
>> - Review fixes 3
>
> src/hotspot/share/runti
On Tue, 13 Apr 2021 07:44:58 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
> Could be a neat use of a lambda "on_suspension_do" ...
If no one else picks that up, I'll give it go after this :)
-
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/3191
On Wed, 14 Apr 2021 02:10:18 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
>> Robbin Ehn has updated the pull request incrementally with two additional
>> commits since the last revision:
>>
>> - Obsolete unused flags
>> - Review fixes 3
>
> src/hotspot/share/runt
On Tue, 13 Apr 2021 07:44:58 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
> Could be a neat use of a lambda "on_suspension_do" ...
If no one else picks that up, I'll give it go after this :)
-
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/3191
On Tue, 13 Apr 2021 07:44:58 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
> Could be a neat use of a lambda "on_suspension_do" ...
If no one else picks that up, I'll give it go after this :)
-
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/3191
On Tue, 13 Apr 2021 07:44:58 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
> Could be a neat use of a lambda "on_suspension_do" ...
If no one else picks that up, I'll give it go after this :)
-
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/3191
On Tue, 13 Apr 2021 07:44:58 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
> Could be a neat use of a lambda "on_suspension_do" ...
If no one else picks that up, I'll give it go after this :)
-
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/3191
On Tue, 13 Apr 2021 07:44:58 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
> Could be a neat use of a lambda "on_suspension_do" ...
If no one else picks that up, I'll give it go after this :)
-
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/3191
On Tue, 13 Apr 2021 07:44:58 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
> Could be a neat use of a lambda "on_suspension_do" ...
If no one else picks that up, I'll give it go after this :)
-
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/3191
On Tue, 13 Apr 2021 07:44:58 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
> Could be a neat use of a lambda "on_suspension_do" ...
If no one else picks that up, I'll give it go after this :)
-
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/3191
On Tue, 13 Apr 2021 07:44:58 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
> Could be a neat use of a lambda "on_suspension_do" ...
If no one else picks that up, I'll give it go after this :)
-
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/3191
1 - 100 of 506 matches
Mail list logo
