Re: RFR: 8264124: Update MXBean specification and implementation to extend mapping of CompositeType to records [v2]

2021-03-26 Thread Mandy Chung
On Fri, 26 Mar 2021 15:15:48 GMT, Daniel Fuchs wrote: >> This RFE proposes to extend the MXBean framework to define a mapping to >> records. >> >> The MXBean framework already defines a mapping of `CompositeType` to plain >> java objects. Records are a natural representation of

Re: RFR: 8264124: Update MXBean specification and implementation to extend mapping of CompositeType to records [v2]

2021-03-26 Thread Mandy Chung
On Sat, 27 Mar 2021 01:40:17 GMT, Mandy Chung wrote: >> Daniel Fuchs has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional >> commit since the last revision: >> >> Fixed typo. Moved example with record after example with from method to >> respect the logical order of precedence. >

Re: os_windows.cpp : simplify is_thread_cpu_time_supported ?

2021-03-26 Thread David Holmes
On 26/03/2021 6:06 pm, Baesken, Matthias wrote: Hi David, thanks for the info . I found https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/procthread/thread-security-and-access-rights so it looks like we need THREAD_QUERY_INFORMATION or THREAD_QUERY_LIMITED_INFORMATION access right for

Re: RFR: 8264087: Use the blessed modifier order in jdk.jconsole

2021-03-26 Thread Claes Redestad
On Tue, 23 Mar 2021 21:43:47 GMT, Alex Blewitt wrote: > 8264087: Use the blessed modifier order in jdk.jconsole Marked as reviewed by redestad (Reviewer). - PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/3164

Integrated: 8264087: Use the blessed modifier order in jdk.jconsole

2021-03-26 Thread Alex Blewitt
On Tue, 23 Mar 2021 21:43:47 GMT, Alex Blewitt wrote: > 8264087: Use the blessed modifier order in jdk.jconsole This pull request has now been integrated. Changeset: 59ed1fa2 Author:Alex Blewitt Committer: Claes Redestad URL: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/commit/59ed1fa2 Stats:

Re: RFR: 8264087: Use the blessed modifier order in jdk.jconsole

2021-03-26 Thread Alex Menkov
On Tue, 23 Mar 2021 21:43:47 GMT, Alex Blewitt wrote: > 8264087: Use the blessed modifier order in jdk.jconsole Marked as reviewed by amenkov (Reviewer). - PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/3164

Re: RFR: 8264124: Update MXBean specification and implementation to extend mapping of CompositeType to records

2021-03-26 Thread Chris Hegarty
On Thu, 25 Mar 2021 17:30:52 GMT, Daniel Fuchs wrote: > This RFE proposes to extend the MXBean framework to define a mapping to > records. > > The MXBean framework already defines a mapping of `CompositeType` to plain > java objects. Records are a natural representation of CompositeTypes. A

Re: RFR: 8264124: Update MXBean specification and implementation to extend mapping of CompositeType to records [v2]

2021-03-26 Thread Daniel Fuchs
> This RFE proposes to extend the MXBean framework to define a mapping to > records. > > The MXBean framework already defines a mapping of `CompositeType` to plain > java objects. Records are a natural representation of CompositeTypes. A > record can be easily reconstructed from a

Re: RFR: 8264124: Update MXBean specification and implementation to extend mapping of CompositeType to records [v2]

2021-03-26 Thread Daniel Fuchs
On Fri, 26 Mar 2021 14:45:05 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote: >> Daniel Fuchs has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional >> commit since the last revision: >> >> Fixed typo. Moved example with record after example with from method to >> respect the logical order of precedence. >

Re: RFR: 8264124: Update MXBean specification and implementation to extend mapping of CompositeType to records

2021-03-26 Thread Alan Bateman
On Thu, 25 Mar 2021 17:30:52 GMT, Daniel Fuchs wrote: > This RFE proposes to extend the MXBean framework to define a mapping to > records. > > The MXBean framework already defines a mapping of `CompositeType` to plain > java objects. Records are a natural representation of CompositeTypes. A

Re: RFR: 8257831: Suspend with handshakes

2021-03-26 Thread Richard Reingruber
On Fri, 26 Mar 2021 12:06:31 GMT, Robbin Ehn wrote: > > > > Hi Robbin, > > I think the preview/pre-review #2625 of this was affected by mailing-list > > hick-up as I've not received a notification about it and I could not find > > it in the archives either. Just wanted to let you know in

Re: RFR: 8176026: SA: Huge heap sizes cause a negative value to be displayed in the jhisto heap total [v2]

2021-03-26 Thread Koichi Sakata
On Wed, 24 Mar 2021 18:01:30 GMT, Marcus G K Williams wrote: >> Koichi Sakata has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional >> commit since the last revision: >> >> Fix the sort bug for huge bytes in jhisto > > Marked as reviewed by mgkw...@github.com (no known OpenJDK

Re: RFR: 8176026: SA: Huge heap sizes cause a negative value to be displayed in the jhisto heap total [v3]

2021-03-26 Thread Koichi Sakata
> When a heap is used more than about 2.1GB, clhsdb jhisto shows a negative > number in the total field. > > $ java -Xmx20g Sample > > $ jhsdb clhsdb --pid 5773 > Attaching to process 5773, please wait... > hsdb> jhisto > ... > 299:1 16 jdk.internal.misc.Unsafe > 300:

Re: RFR: 8257831: Suspend with handshakes [v2]

2021-03-26 Thread Robbin Ehn
> 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 > check it's poll before leaving the dormant state. To stop the

Re: RFR: 8257831: Suspend with handshakes

2021-03-26 Thread Robbin Ehn
On Fri, 26 Mar 2021 11:12:38 GMT, Richard Reingruber wrote: > Hi Robbin, > I think the preview/pre-review #2625 of this was affected by mailing-list > hick-up as I've not received a notification about it and I could not find it > in the archives either. Just wanted to let you know in case you

Re: RFR: 8257831: Suspend with handshakes

2021-03-26 Thread Richard Reingruber
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 > check

Re: RFR: 8264166: OopStorage should support specifying MEMFLAGS for allocations [v2]

2021-03-26 Thread Kim Barrett
> Please review this change to OopStorage to allow the MEMFLAGS value for > associated allocations to be specified when the storage object is > constructed. This allows a subsystem that needs an OopStorage object to > associate its allocation with others for that subsystem in NMT tracking and

Integrated: 8264166: OopStorage should support specifying MEMFLAGS for allocations

2021-03-26 Thread Kim Barrett
On Thu, 25 Mar 2021 07:27:58 GMT, Kim Barrett wrote: > Please review this change to OopStorage to allow the MEMFLAGS value for > associated allocations to be specified when the storage object is > constructed. This allows a subsystem that needs an OopStorage object to > associate its

Re: RFR: 8264087: Use the blessed modifier order in jdk.jconsole

2021-03-26 Thread Alan Bateman
On Tue, 23 Mar 2021 21:43:47 GMT, Alex Blewitt wrote: > 8264087: Use the blessed modifier order in jdk.jconsole Marked as reviewed by alanb (Reviewer). - PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/3164