David, > jhsdb - or is that not an issue? Is jhsdb new with 9?
jhsdb is new for jdk9 and we can lift it's behavior as necessary. Personally, I'm for adding --no-mixed and leave default to mixed (making --mixed NOP), because mixed is the most common usecase. But I'm OK with a simple fix that restores original jstack behavior. -Dmitry On 2016-08-05 14:38, David Holmes wrote: > On 5/08/2016 8:55 PM, Yasumasa Suenaga wrote: >> Hi David, >> >> Thank you for your comment. >> >> For not to break current behavior, I think we should not change c'tor of >> JStack. >> I uploaded new webrev: >> >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ysuenaga/JDK-8163185/webrev.01/ >> >> David, is it okay? > > It is a better fix in my opinion but still changes the behaviour of > jhsdb - or is that not an issue? Is jhsdb new with 9? > > Thanks, > David > >> Dmitry, could you review again? >> >> >> Thanks, >> >> Yasumasa >> >> >> On 2016/08/05 14:49, David Holmes wrote: >>> On 5/08/2016 12:24 AM, Yasumasa Suenaga wrote: >>>> Hi all, >>>> >>>> This review request is related to [1]. >>>> >>>> "jhsdb jstack" should work as normal mode without being added --mixed >>>> option. >>>> However, this command always works as mixed mode. >>> >>> So it seems to me the JStack class has a very poorly designed API and >>> command-line interface. It appears that jstack wants to default to >>> mixedMode and concurrentLocks, but provides no means to disable those >>> defaults. Given there is no way to turn those settings off from the >>> commad-line then the default should be that they are off! Then you >>> would not need current proposed change. >>> >>> That said the proposed fix effectively disables those defaults, which >>> seems to me to be a change in behaviour. >>> >>> I can't see a way to fix this without breaking existing behaviour >>> somewhere. In which case I would change the way the JStack instance is >>> initialized by default ie: >>> >>> public JStack() { >>> this(true, true); >>> } >>> >>> becomes: >>> >>> public JStack() { >>> this(false, false); >>> } >>> >>> Or it may be better to handle this on the jhsdb side and change this: >>> >>> JStack.main(newArgs.toArray(new String[newArgs.size()])); >>> to >>> >>> JStack js = new jstack(false,false); >>> js.runWithArgs(newArgs.toArray(new String[newArgs.size()])); >>> >>> >>> Cheers, >>> David >>> >>>> So I uploaded webrev for this issue. Could you review it? >>>> >>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ysuenaga/JDK-8163185/webrev.00/ >>>> >>>> >>>> I'm jdk 9 reviewer (ysuenaga), but I cannot access JPRT. >>>> So I need a sponsor. >>>> >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> >>>> Yasumasa >>>> >>>> >>>> [1] >>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/serviceability-dev/2016-August/020087.html >>>> >>>> >>>> -- Dmitry Samersoff Oracle Java development team, Saint Petersburg, Russia * I would love to change the world, but they won't give me the sources.
