On 23/02/2018 5:19 AM, Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
Agreed, when those hit the Code they will require a different Change.
(Which does not make it less useful for the current Code). Probably the
ID is from the days of green threads anyway. 😊
Advertising
No it was added in Java SE 5 as a way to uniquely identify Threads.
I don't think this request has any impact on Fibers at all. At any given
time a piece of executing Java code is executing on a current Thread,
and that current Thread must be running on a native thread (regardless
of mapping) and the native thread has an id. The only use for exposing
such an id is to allow you to correlate information obtained from inside
the VM, with information observed outside, possibly by external tools.
David
-----
--
http://bernd.eckenfels.net
*Von: *Jeremy Manson <mailto:jeremyman...@google.com>
*Gesendet: *Donnerstag, 22. Februar 2018 20:15
*An: *Bernd Eckenfels <mailto:e...@zusammenkunft.net>
*Cc: *Alan Bateman <mailto:alan.bate...@oracle.com>;
serviceability-dev@openjdk.java.net
<mailto:serviceability-dev@openjdk.java.net>; loom-...@openjdk.java.net
<mailto:loom-...@openjdk.java.net>
*Betreff: *Re: Thread Native ID Access
Bernd,
The thread ID needs to be unique, so that approach might actually cause
problems with fibers, depending on their implementation.
Jeremy
On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 11:07 AM, Bernd Eckenfels
<e...@zusammenkunft.net <mailto:e...@zusammenkunft.net>> wrote:
Hello,
one Option would be to use nid as tid on platforms where the
datatype is compatible. Thread#getId() is „positive Long“. That
should work(?) at least on Windows and Linux, it will actually
reduce some Overhead and make the identifier more useful for
Debugging without adding a new API. With the thread-name Counter not
being the tid there are way too many different identifiers anyway.
Gruss
Bernd
--
http://bernd.eckenfels.net
*Von: *Jeremy Manson <mailto:jeremyman...@google.com>
*Gesendet: *Donnerstag, 22. Februar 2018 20:01
*An: *Alan Bateman <mailto:alan.bate...@oracle.com>
*Cc: *serviceability-dev@openjdk.java.net
<mailto:serviceability-dev@openjdk.java.net>;
loom-...@openjdk.java.net <mailto:loom-...@openjdk.java.net>
*Betreff: *Re: Thread Native ID Access
There isn't a pressing need. I wrote this patch almost 5 years
ago. We can do what we've always done and keep the patch locally.
It's just more work for us to keep forward porting it, and loss of
potential benefit to the community.
I can certainly understand not wanting this in the high-value real
estate in java.lang.Thread. I am reasonably happy just to add it to
ThreadInfo, or, if we think even that's too much, just to
com.sun.management.ThreadMXBean.
Since Alan cc'd loom-dev, I'll reiterate what I said before: IMO,
for the purposes of this feature, it doesn't matter how fibers map
to Java Threads, or how Java Threads map to OS threads. As long as
a Java Thread is running on some OS thread (and nothing that we do
in the JVM will change that), this proposed API can return whatever
OS thread the Java Thread currently maps to.
David asked the following question:
For things like /proc/<pid>/task/<nid> is there a way to say
<nid> in a way that means "current thread"? That may be a
partial solution - or even whole if you could then read back the
actual id?
Linux 3.17 and greater has /proc/thread-self. But I'm not sure
that's a solution - if I want to use this to generate a list of
threads with Java names and OS-level state (which often differs from
JVM thread state), then I'm not sure how I would do that.
Mandy says this:
- other than VM threads and Java to native OS threads mapping,
any other
 items on your list for monitoring?
There is a bunch of stuff - the ongoing thread with JC Beyler about
our heap profiler is the current thing on the front burner. The
only thing that is relevant to thread monitoring is the
aforementioned list of VM threads, but that's not a point change to
ThreadInfo.
For some of the other stuff, we need to do more due diligence on our
end or wait and see what you are doing before pushing it. For
example, we have programmatic access to JFR event based GC history,
but we're waiting to see how the open-sourcing goes on that before
pushing. We have TSan support, which we've mentioned in various
forums before. We let people register native callbacks on
allocation sites, but that's likely to get folded into the heap
profiling work. We let monitoring tools look at the code cache
directly to avoid JVMTI overhead, but that's pretty dangerous, so
I'm not sure that it's a great idea as-is. We have a bunch of extra
entries in perfdata, but we should probably review them to make sure
we still care about all of them.
We also have some bug fixes and performance improvements, and we
should probably just send those in.
Jeremy
On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 7:24 AM, Alan Bateman
<alan.bate...@oracle.com <mailto:alan.bate...@oracle.com>> wrote:
On 21/02/2018 22:40, Jeremy Manson wrote:
Hey folks,
I mentioned earlier in the thread about the
ThreadInfo.from() bug that I found this because I was
looking at fixing JDK-8154176, which proposes introducing
native thread ids to Thread and ThreadInfo.
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8154176
I have a prototype for it. I have a couple of questions,
though:
0) Does anyone object to this being done or my doing it? I
see that it already has an owner.
1) Should the ID be a long? The Hotspot thread dump prints
it out as 0x%x, which is an unsigned hexadecimal integer.
The type hiding behind it is platform-dependent, though: a
pid_t on Linux, an unsigned long on Windows, a thread_t on
Solaris. I could make it a String instead...
Mandy mentioned fibers in one of the replies and I think we do
need to be cautious about exposing native thread IDs in the Java
SE APIs until we have a better sense how some of these APIs will
work. I expect there will be a Thread object per fiber but I'm
less sure on ThreadMXBean. It may be that ThreadMXBean's
dumpAllThreads returns the ThreadInfos for just the kernels
threads, the equivalent of today where it only returns the
ThreadInfos for the started threads, but once the project is
further along then maybe a different choice might emerge.
If there is pressing need then could we just expose it it in the
JDK-specific com.sun.management.ThreadMXBean API instead?
-Alan
