Status of JEP159?

2017-10-16 Thread Thomas Stüfe
Hi all, just a small question. While examining a crash in jvmti_GetClassMethods (jdk9) I noticed that I am able to successfully add and remove methods in a redefined class. But JEP159 is still only in "submitted" stage. Was this feature added for another JEP? Thank you! Kind Regards, Thomas

Re: Status of JEP159?

2017-10-16 Thread David Holmes
Hi Thomas, On 16/10/2017 8:40 PM, Thomas Stüfe wrote: Hi all, just a small question. While examining a crash in jvmti_GetClassMethods (jdk9) I noticed that I am able to successfully add and remove methods in a redefined class. But JEP159 is still only in "submitted" stage. Was this feature

RE: RFR: 8187042: Events to show which objects are associated with biased object revocations

2017-10-16 Thread Markus Gronlund
Hi Robin,   Looks good. Thanks Markus   From: Robin Westberg Sent: den 13 oktober 2017 16:56 To: David Holmes Cc: serviceability-dev@openjdk.java.net Subject: Re: RFR: 8187042: Events to show which objects are associated with biased object revocations   Hi again,   Here’s an updated ve

RE: RFR(XS): 8173917: Safepoint ID is not consistent across event-based tracing events

2017-10-16 Thread Markus Gronlund
Hi Robin, Looks good. Thanks Markus From: Robin Westberg Sent: den 13 oktober 2017 16:55 To: serviceability-dev@openjdk.java.net Subject: RFR(XS): 8173917: Safepoint ID is not consistent across event-based tracing events Hi all, Please review the following change that aligns

Re: Status of JEP159?

2017-10-16 Thread Robbin Ehn
Hi, if you use class file load hook you can add/remove public methods. Since this is before the class have been published we don't know how it should look. Whether this is according to spec or not, I have no clue. Is it on CFLH ? /Robbin On 10/16/2017 01:20 PM, David Holmes wrote: Hi Thomas,

PING: RFR: JDK-8151815: Could not parse core image with JSnap.

2017-10-16 Thread Yasumasa Suenaga
PING: Could you review it? http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ysuenaga/JDK-8151815/webrev.05/ Thanks, Yasumasa On 2017/10/03 13:18, Yasumasa Suenaga wrote: Hi all, I added gtest unit test case for this change in new webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ysuenaga/JDK-8151815/webrev.05/ Co

Re: Status of JEP159?

2017-10-16 Thread Alan Bateman
On 16/10/2017 14:21, Robbin Ehn wrote: Hi, if you use class file load hook you can add/remove public methods. Since this is before the class have been published we don't know how it should look. Whether this is according to spec or not, I have no clue. Is it on CFLH ? No issue adding or rem

Re: Status of JEP159?

2017-10-16 Thread Robbin Ehn
On 10/16/2017 03:31 PM, Alan Bateman wrote: On 16/10/2017 14:21, Robbin Ehn wrote: Hi, if you use class file load hook you can add/remove public methods. Since this is before the class have been published we don't know how it should look. Whether this is according to spec or not, I have no cl

Re: RFR: 8187042: Events to show which objects are associated with biased object revocations

2017-10-16 Thread Robin Westberg
Thanks for the reviews Markus, Erik and David! Filed https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8189368 for the improvement to add information on the thread currently holding the bias when it is revoked. Best regards, Robin > On 16 Oct 2017, at

Re: Status of JEP159?

2017-10-16 Thread Thomas Stüfe
Hi David, On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 1:20 PM, David Holmes wrote: > Hi Thomas, > > On 16/10/2017 8:40 PM, Thomas Stüfe wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> just a small question. >> >> While examining a crash in jvmti_GetClassMethods (jdk9) I noticed that I >> am able to successfully add and remove methods

Re: Status of JEP159?

2017-10-16 Thread Alan Bateman
On 16/10/2017 14:55, Robbin Ehn wrote: There is actually an issue, we start all transformation with 'on' disk version. If the agent that did the addition of a public method e.g. exits(removeTransformer) we can never re-transform it, instead we get: "error method delete" It have been suggested

Re: Low-Overhead Heap Profiling

2017-10-16 Thread Robbin Ehn
Hi JC, I saw a webrev.12 in the directory, with only test changes(11->12), so I took that version. I had a look and tested the tests, worked fine! First glance at the code (looking at full v12) some minor things below, mostly unused stuff. Thanks, Robbin diff -r 9047e0d726d6 src/hotspot/shar

Re: Status of JEP159?

2017-10-16 Thread Robbin Ehn
On 10/16/2017 05:44 PM, Alan Bateman wrote: On 16/10/2017 14:55, Robbin Ehn wrote: There is actually an issue, we start all transformation with 'on' disk version. If the agent that did the addition of a public method e.g. exits(removeTransformer) we can never re-transform it, instead we get: "

Re: Low-Overhead Heap Profiling

2017-10-16 Thread JC Beyler
Hi Robbin, That is because version 11 to 12 was only a test change. I was going to write about it and say here are the webrev links: Incremental: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rasbold/8171119/webrev.11_12/ Full webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rasbold/8171119/webrev.12/ This change focused only

Re: Status of JEP159?

2017-10-16 Thread Alan Bateman
On 16/10/2017 16:59, Robbin Ehn wrote: I see, in my case it's several CFLH agents with retransformation capability. The one that added the public method is removed and no longer called. Leaving the other agents without the ability to retransform anymore since they get the class file bytes wit

Re: Status of JEP159?

2017-10-16 Thread David Holmes
On 17/10/2017 1:03 AM, Thomas Stüfe wrote: Hi David, On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 1:20 PM, David Holmes > wrote: Hi Thomas, On 16/10/2017 8:40 PM, Thomas Stüfe wrote: Hi all, just a small question. While examining a crash in jvmti_

Re: Status of JEP159?

2017-10-16 Thread David Holmes
On 16/10/2017 11:21 PM, Robbin Ehn wrote: Hi, if you use class file load hook you can add/remove public methods. Since this is before the class have been published we don't know how it should look. Whether this is according to spec or not, I have no clue. There's no special dispensation in th

RFR (XS): 8173936 [TESTBUG] test/serviceability/jvmti/ModuleAwareAgents/ClassFileLoadHook/MAAClassFileLoadHook.java needs to be re-examined

2017-10-16 Thread serguei.spit...@oracle.com
Please, review a fix for the test bug:   https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8173936 Webrev:   http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sspitsyn/webrevs/2017/hotspot/8173936-MAA-cflh.1/ Summary:   This test expects CFLH events in the JVMTI start phase bu

Re: RFR (XS): 8173936 [TESTBUG] test/serviceability/jvmti/ModuleAwareAgents/ClassFileLoadHook/MAAClassFileLoadHook.java needs to be re-examined

2017-10-16 Thread David Holmes
Hi Serguei, On 17/10/2017 3:35 PM, serguei.spit...@oracle.com wrote: Please, review a fix for the test bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8173936 Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sspitsyn/webrevs/2017/hotspot/8173936-MAA-cflh.1/ Summary:   This test expects CFLH events in the

Re: RFR (XS): 8173936 [TESTBUG] test/serviceability/jvmti/ModuleAwareAgents/ClassFileLoadHook/MAAClassFileLoadHook.java needs to be re-examined

2017-10-16 Thread serguei.spit...@oracle.com
Hi David, On 10/16/17 23:24, David Holmes wrote: Hi Serguei, On 17/10/2017 3:35 PM, serguei.spit...@oracle.com wrote: Please, review a fix for the test bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8173936 Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sspitsyn/webrevs/2017/hotspot/8173936-MAA-cflh.1/