PING:
Could you review it?
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ysuenaga/JDK-8185796/webrev.04/
I want to merge this change to jdk 10. So I need a reviewer and sponsor.
Yasumasa
On 2017/11/14 9:58, Yasumasa Suenaga wrote:
PING:
Could you review it? We need a reviewer and sponsor.
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ysuenaga/JDK-8185796/webrev.04/
Thanks,
Yasumasa
2017-11-09 23:34 GMT+09:00 Yasumasa Suenaga <yasue...@gmail.com>:
Thanks, Jini!
I'm waiting for Reviewer and sponsor.
Yasumasa
On 2017/11/09 23:25, Jini George wrote:
Hi Yasumasa,
This looks fine to me.
Thank you,
Jini (Not a Reviewer).
On 11/9/2017 6:55 PM, Yasumasa Suenaga wrote:
Hi Jini,
Thank you for your comment!
I've fixed and uploaded new webrev:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ysuenaga/JDK-8185796/webrev.04/
*
src/jdk.hotspot.agent/share/classes/sun/jvm/hotspot/runtime/JavaVFrame.java
-> Lines 198-212: I feel this commented out code could be removed and
replaced by a call to printLockInfo(), though I am not entirely sure as
to when this printOn() gets exercised.
I agree with you to remove these comments.
They are insufficient to show all locks like a my first webrev [1].
webrev.04 is implemented to follow HotSpot implementation.
Thanks,
Yasumasa
[1] http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ysuenaga/JDK-8185796/webrev.00/
On 2017/11/09 2:19, Jini George wrote:
Hi Yasumasa,
Your changes look good to me overall. Some nits:
*
src/jdk.hotspot.agent/share/classes/sun/jvm/hotspot/runtime/BasicType.java
(lines 138 to 152):
-> It would be nice if you could indent the "case" statements.
*
src/jdk.hotspot.agent/share/classes/sun/jvm/hotspot/ui/classbrowser/HTMLGenerator.java
-> It would be good if the indentation here for the newly added lines
matches that of the rest of the file. (4 spaces instead of 2).
*
src/jdk.hotspot.agent/share/classes/sun/jvm/hotspot/runtime/JavaVFrame.java
-> Lines 198-212: I feel this commented out code could be removed and
replaced by a call to printLockInfo(), though I am not entirely sure as
to when this printOn() gets exercised.
* test/hotspot/jtreg/serviceability/sa/TestJhsdbJstackLock.java
-> You can remove these lines:
import java.util.Scanner;
import java.util.stream.Collectors;
import java.io.File;
Thanks,
Jini (Not a Reviewer).
On 11/1/2017 6:28 PM, Yasumasa Suenaga wrote:
PING: Could you review and sponsor it?
?? http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ysuenaga/JDK-8185796/webrev.03/
Thanks,
Yasumasa
On 2017/10/09 23:19, Yasumasa Suenaga wrote:
Hi all,
I uploaded new webrev to be adapted to current jdk10/hs:
?? http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ysuenaga/JDK-8185796/webrev.03/
Please review and sponsor it.
Thanks,
Yasumasa
On 2017/09/27 0:31, Yasumasa Suenaga wrote:
Hi all,
I uploaded new webrev to be adapted to jdk10/hs:
?? http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ysuenaga/JDK-8185796/webrev.02/
Thanks,
Yasumasa
On 2017/08/24 22:59, Yasumasa Suenaga wrote:
Thanks Jini!
I uploaded new webrev:
?? http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ysuenaga/JDK-8185796/webrev.01/
This webrev has been ported print_lock_info() to JavaVFrame.java,
and I've added new testcase for `jhsdb jstack` and jstack command on
`jhsdb clhsdb`.
Yasumasa
On 2017/08/24 18:01, Jini George wrote:
Apologize for the late reply, Yasumasa.
I think so, but I guess it is difficult.
For example, test for CLHSDB command is provided as
test/serviceability/sa/TestPrintMdo.java .
But target process seems to be fixed to "LingeredApp".
Can we change it to another program which generates lock
contention?
You can take a look at any of the
hotspot/test/serviceability/sa/LingeredAppWith*.java files for
this. The target process does not have to be be fixed to
LingeredApp -- in these LingeredAppWith* cases, the targets are
test-specific variations built on top of LingeredApp for ease of
implementation.
Thanks,
Jini.
