Hi David, I uploaded new webrev:
Advertising
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ysuenaga/JDK-8185164/webrev.04/ 2017-08-07 11:23 GMT+09:00 David Holmes <david.hol...@oracle.com>: > On 7/08/2017 10:33 AM, Yasumasa Suenaga wrote: >> >> Hi Dan, >> >>>> * GetOwnedMonitorInfoTest.java >>>> - I use Thread#yield() to wait until MonitorContendedEnter event >>>> is >>>> fired. >>> >>> >>> Please switch back to a small Thread.sleep(). Thread.yield() >>> can be a no-op on some platforms which will make the wait >>> loop very hot. >> >> >> I fixed it in new webrev: >> >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ysuenaga/JDK-8185164/webrev.03/ > > > I have one concern with the test. Are you certain that the only possible > contended-enter event can come from the attempt to lock the > GetOwnedMonitorInfoTest.class object? Something from -Xcomp perhaps? The > test would likely still pass, but it would be checking the "wrong" event. I guess you mean other place (e.g. in class library) might generate MonitorContendedEnter event. So I check the class of monitor object in JNI test module. > A few nits in the test > > GetOwnedMonitorInfoTest.java: > > Should have @bug 8185164 Added. > -- > > 27 * @summary Verifies the JVMTI GetOwnedMonitorInfo API > > That's a bit of an overstatement - this only verifies that a contended > monitor does not show up in the set of owned monitors. (Even that is > somewhat inaccurate) I modified the summary, but I'm not good at English. So please tell me if it is incorrect :-) > -- > > Style-nit: > > 35 public class GetOwnedMonitorInfoTest implements Runnable { > > There is no need to implement Runnable and provide the run() method as an > instance method of the class because there is no state. The simpler > construct would be to define an anonymous inner class when creating the > thread: > > Thread t1 = new Thread() { > public void run() { > synchronized (GetOwnedMonitorInfoTest.class) { > System.out.println("Thread in sync section: " + name); > } > } > }; Fixed (I use lambda expression in new webrev.) > -- > > Style-nit: > > 42 System.err.println("java.library.path: " > 43 + System.getProperty("java.library.path")); > > line continuation should indent to align after ( i.e. > > System.err.println("java.library.path: " > + System.getProperty("java.library.path")); Fixed. > -- > > Style-nit: > > 48 native static int check(); > 49 native static boolean hasEventPosted(); > > modifier order should be "static native". They could/should also be private. Fixed. > -- > > Style-nit: > > 53 try { > 54 synchronized (GetOwnedMonitorInfoTest.class) { > 55 System.out.println("Thread in sync section: " + name); > 56 } > 57 } catch (Exception e) { > 58 e.printStackTrace(); > 59 } > > There is no need for a try-catch here as no Exceptions (other than > RuntimeExceptions) are possible, and the default exception handler will take > care of printing the stacktrace regardless. Fixed. > -- > > Style-nit: > > 79 int status = check(); > 80 if (status != 0) { > > No need for local variable as it's only used once. Fixed. > --- > > libGetOwnedMonitorInfoTest.c > > Style-nit: > > 50 static volatile jboolean event_has_posted = JNI_FALSE; > > double-space after jboolean Fixed. > -- > > Query: > > 64 fprintf(stderr, "MonitorContendedEnter: error in JVMTI > GetThreadInfo: %d\n", err); > > do we not have anything to print out a more meaningful error message that > the integer value of the JVMTI error code? I added ShowErrorMessage() to show JVMTI error message. It uses GetErrorName() JVMTI function. > -- > > Style query: do we do indent of 2 or 4 in hotspot C code tests ? Fixed in C code. Thanks, Yasumasa > Thanks, > David > ------ > > >> >> Thanks, >> >> Yasumasa >> >> >> 2017-08-06 23:54 GMT+09:00 Daniel D. Daugherty >> <daniel.daughe...@oracle.com>: >>> >>> On 8/6/17 1:28 AM, Yasumasa Suenaga wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> Hi Dan, Serguei, >>>> >>>> Thanks Serguei! I can run new testcase on my environment. >>>> >>>> Dan, I modified your patch and uploaded as webrev: >>>> >>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ysuenaga/JDK-8185164/webrev.02/ >>>> >>>> >>>> * GetOwnedMonitorInfoTest.java >>>> - I use Thread#yield() to wait until MonitorContendedEnter event >>>> is >>>> fired. >>> >>> >>> >>> Please switch back to a small Thread.sleep(). Thread.yield() >>> can be a no-op on some platforms which will make the wait >>> loop very hot. >>> >>> >>>> * libGetOwnedMonitorInfoTest.c >>>> - I added "volatile" to "status" variable. >>> >>> >>> >>> Sorry I missed that one. >>> >>> >>>> - I moved "event_has_posted = JNI_TRUE" to each before return >>>> statement. >>> >>> >>> >>> Good catch. My original setting of event_has_posted had >>> a narrow race. >>> >>> I'm good on the changes. I'll have test results later today. >>> >>> Dan >>> >>> >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Yasumasa >>>> >>>> >>>> On 2017/08/06 11:33, Daniel D. Daugherty wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Hi Yasumasa and Serguei, >>>>> >>>>> I've made some tweaks to the test and attached an updated patch: >>>>> >>>>> GetOwnedMonitorInfoTest.java changes: >>>>> >>>>> - deleted thread 't2' >>>>> - made changes to make monitor contention not racy: >>>>> - added 'hasEventPosted()' native function >>>>> - changed Main to grab the GetOwnedMonitorInfoTest.class monitor >>>>> before launching 't1' >>>>> - added loop to check hasEventPosted() function while holding >>>>> the GetOwnedMonitorInfoTest.class monitor >>>>> - moved the delay to this new loop >>>>> >>>>> libGetOwnedMonitorInfoTest.c changes: >>>>> >>>>> - added event_has_posted flag to know when MonitorContendedEnter >>>>> event has been posted >>>>> - added missing error checks to JVM/TI functions >>>>> - print an error message when MonitorContendedEnter or >>>>> MonitorContendedEntered gets an incorrect monitor count >>>>> - print error and warnings to 'stderr' >>>>> - add Java_GetOwnedMonitorInfoTest_hasEventPosted function >>>>> >>>>> I've tested the latest version of test in a repo without the fix >>>>> and it fails (as expected). Here's some sample output: >>>>> >>>>> ----------System.out:(7/231)---------- >>>>> Agent_OnLoad started >>>>> Agent_OnLoad finished >>>>> Main starting worker thread. >>>>> Main waiting for event. >>>>> Thread in sync section: Thread-1 >>>>> MonitorContendedEnter: Thread-1 owns 1 monitor(s) >>>>> MonitorContendedEntered: Thread-1 owns 1 monitor(s) >>>>> ----------System.err:(14/931)---------- >>>>> MonitorContendedEnter: FAIL: monitorCount should be zero. >>>>> java.lang.RuntimeException: FAILED status returned from the agent >>>>> at >>>>> GetOwnedMonitorInfoTest.main(GetOwnedMonitorInfoTest.java:81) >>>>> at >>>>> java.base/jdk.internal.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native >>>>> Method) >>>>> at >>>>> >>>>> java.base/jdk.internal.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:62) >>>>> at >>>>> >>>>> java.base/jdk.internal.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:43) >>>>> at java.base/java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:564) >>>>> at >>>>> >>>>> com.sun.javatest.regtest.agent.MainWrapper$MainThread.run(MainWrapper.java:115) >>>>> at java.base/java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:844) >>>>> >>>>> JavaTest Message: Test threw exception: java.lang.RuntimeException: >>>>> FAILED status returned from the agent >>>>> JavaTest Message: shutting down test >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Dan >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 8/5/17 12:37 PM, serguei.spit...@oracle.com wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Hi Yasumasa, >>>>>> >>>>>> I use the following script to run the test on linux: >>>>>> >>>>>> % cat run.sh >>>>>> #!/bin/sh >>>>>> REPO=<my_repo> >>>>>> IMAGES=${REPO}/build/linux-x86_64-normal-server-release/images >>>>>> export JAVA_HOME=${IMAGES}/jdk >>>>>> export LD_LIBRARY_PATH=${IMAGES}/test/hotspot/jtreg/native >>>>>> >>>>>> jtreg -J-Dtest.java.opts='-server' \ >>>>>> -jdk ${JAVA_HOME} \ >>>>>> -nativepath:${LD_LIBRARY_PATH} \ >>>>>> $REPO/hotspot/test/serviceability/jvmti/GetOwnedMonitorInfo >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>> Serguei >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On 8/5/17 06:31, Yasumasa Suenaga wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi Serguei, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I uploaded new webrev: >>>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ysuenaga/JDK-8185164/webrev.01/ >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I tried to run serviceability/jvmti/GetOwnedMonitorInfo but it is >>>>>>> failed because jtreg needs -nativepath option. >>>>>>> But I didn't know what path should I set to -nativepath. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Yasumasa >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 2017/08/05 20:20, serguei.spit...@oracle.com wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hi Yasumasa, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Please, merge the converted testcase. >>>>>>>> It still might need more tweaks though. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>> Serguei >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 8/5/17 03:18, Yasumasa Suenaga wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Hi Serguei, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Thank you so much! >>>>>>>>> Should I merge your testcase? Or can you push this change? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I agree to your change as a reviewer. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Yasumasa >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On 2017/08/05 11:34, serguei.spit...@oracle.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> The updated patch attached. >>>>>>>>>> Now the test is passed with the suggested fix and failed without >>>>>>>>>> it. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>> Serguei >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On 8/4/17 15:45, serguei.spit...@oracle.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On 8/4/17 14:26, Daniel D. Daugherty wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On 8/4/17 3:17 PM, serguei.spit...@oracle.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> The patch is attached. >>>>>>>>>>>>> It may need some tweaks though. >>>>>>>>>>>>> I was not able to make it fail yet. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I don't think the original test had "failure" detection. >>>>>>>>>>>> You were just supposed to notice that a pending monitor >>>>>>>>>>>> was listed under the wrong list. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Nothing is listed. >>>>>>>>>>> Strange thing is I do not see the monitor events fired. >>>>>>>>>>> I'm using 10 for testing. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>>> Serguei >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Dan >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 8/4/17 12:45, Daniel D. Daugherty wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks Serguei! >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I happen to be doing a test run this weekend that includes >>>>>>>>>>>>>> most >>>>>>>>>>>>>> of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> JPDA stack of tests so I'll include the following in my >>>>>>>>>>>>>> experiment: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> $ hg log -v -r tip >>>>>>>>>>>>>> changeset: 12872:bb66cd7c61b1 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> tag: 8185164.patch >>>>>>>>>>>>>> tag: qtip >>>>>>>>>>>>>> tag: tip >>>>>>>>>>>>>> user: dcubed >>>>>>>>>>>>>> date: Fri Aug 04 13:41:29 2017 -0600 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> files: src/share/vm/runtime/objectMonitor.cpp >>>>>>>>>>>>>> description: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> imported patch 8185164.patch >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> That will get the product code changes a complete round of >>>>>>>>>>>>>> testing >>>>>>>>>>>>>> on Solaris X64 at least... :-) >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Great! >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>>>>> Serguei >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dan >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 8/4/17 1:31 PM, serguei.spit...@oracle.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dan, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you for letting me know about this discussion. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'll try to convert the attached test case to the JTreg >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> format. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Serguei >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 8/4/17 11:16, Daniel D. Daugherty wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Adding Serguei to this thread directly since he's back from >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> vacation! >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 7/31/17 10:14 PM, David Holmes wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Dan, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 26/07/2017 11:52 PM, Daniel D. Daugherty wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 7/26/17 12:11 AM, David Holmes wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 26/07/2017 10:27 AM, Yasumasa Suenaga wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Dan, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I've added some analysis to the bug report >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks! >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I tried to fix this issue in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> JvmtiEnvBase::get_owned_monitors() at first. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But it is difficult because we cannot know pending >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> monitor >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> if thread state is MONITOR_CONTENDED_ENTER when >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> get_owned_monitor() is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> called. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I need to look closer at this when I get back from >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> vacation >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> next week. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Seems like you're back already. :-) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> A pending monitor should not be reported as owned (unless >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the spec says otherwise) and it seems odd to me to fix >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the current problem >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> by marking the monitor as pending earlier. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's the updating of the _current_pending_monitor field >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> allows JvmtiEnvBase::get_locked_objects_in_frame() to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> recognize >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that the monitor observed in the frame is only pending and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is not owned. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I put a fairly detailed note in the bug yesterday, but you >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should look at that when you're officially back! >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks for clarifying things. I also added a comment to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bug report. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think the fix is sound and prevents anyone from observing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the case where the monitor will be seen in the stack-frame, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but has not yet >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> been set as the "pending monitor". As far as I can tell it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is only this case >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (GetOwnedMonitorInfo from the contended-monitor event >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> callback in the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> current thread) that will be able to observe the change. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> One scenario that I worry about here is that a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GetCurrentContendedMonitor() >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> call on a target thread will now be able to return a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> non-NULL >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> value for the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> object, when GetThreadState() will be able to return >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> something >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> other than >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> blocked (on monitor enter) for the thread. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I don't see anything in the JVM/TI spec that says such a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> scenario is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrong; I'm only worried about whether we have any tests that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> would catch >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this slight change in behavior. In any case, one of these >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> operations has >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to "happen first": >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - thread is marked as blocked >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - monitor is flagged as contended >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Currently, they happen in the above order and the fix >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> proposes >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> change the order and I see no reason not to do it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I would like the test attached to the bug to be converted >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> into >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a native >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> JTREG test that lives in hotspot/test/serviceability/jvmti. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> See the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> following test as a possible example: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hotspot/test/serviceability/jvmti/GetNamedModule >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for how to do this... I haven't done one of these new native >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> JTREG >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tests myself, but I believe Serguei has... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dan >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> David >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dan >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> David >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Did you run the jdk repo's com/sun/jdi tests with your >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fix? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I have not done yet. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I have a trip until 28 July JST. So I will run it after >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yasumasa >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2017/07/26 7:05, Daniel D. Daugherty wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 7/24/17 8:40 PM, Yasumasa Suenaga wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi all, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I tried to get owned monitors in MonitorContendedEnter >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> JVMTI event handler. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> However GetOwnedMonitorInfo JVMTI function returns a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> monitor which is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not yet owned. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I attached reproducer to JBS. Please read README.md. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think GetOwnedMonitorInfo() should not return a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pending monitor. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I uploaded webrev. Could you review? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ysuenaga/JDK-8185164/webrev.00/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I hope this fix is applied to 8u or later release. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I cannot access JPRT. So I need a sponsor. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks for the bug report. It's nice to have a test >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> case >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and a proposed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fix all in the bug report! I've added some analysis to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the bug report >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and we'll need to run this fix through Oracle's JPDA >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> test >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> stack which >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is not (yet) open. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Did you run the jdk repo's com/sun/jdi tests with your >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fix? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dan >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yasumasa >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> >
