Thank you, Chris for reviewing this change! Alex, JC, Garry could you please say are you OK with this version of the webrev?
Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dtitov/8211736/webrev.05/ Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8211736 Best regards, Daniil On 10/22/18, 11:18 AM, "Chris Plummer" <chris.plum...@oracle.com> wrote: Hi Daniil, Looks good. thanks, Chris On 10/19/18 4:01 PM, Daniil Titov wrote: > Hi Chris, > > Please review an updated version of the fix that makes the tests to use a custom pattern while waiting for the command to complete. > > Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dtitov/8211736/webrev.05/ > Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8211736 > > Thanks! > --Daniil > > > On 10/19/18, 12:55 PM, "Chris Plummer" <chris.plum...@oracle.com> wrote: > > On 10/19/18 9:47 AM, Daniil Titov wrote: > > Hi Gary and Chris, > > > > I am resending the previous email since the table in that email got corrupted. > > > > Below is what output jdb prints when a breakpoint is hit depending on what suspended policy is used: > > > > The current behavior. > > SUSPEND_ALL: Prompt is printed ( e.g. "main[1]"), location is printed > > SUSPEND_EVENT_THREAD: Prompt is not printed, location is not printed > > SUSPEND_NONE: Prompt is not printed, location is not printed > > > > The fix changes this behavior as the following: > > > > SUSPEND_ALL: Prompt is printed ( e.g. "main[1]"), location is printed > > SUSPEND_EVENT_THREAD: Prompt is printed ( "> "), location is printed > > SUSPEND_NONE: Prompt is printed ( "> "), location is printed > I'm still in favor of this fix. > > > > > > Could you please say is it OK for you or you want that the location was printed only for SUSPEND_ALL case? Or probably just leave all behavior unchanged and close the bug as "not an issue"? > > > > Regarding settable prompt... As I understand Gary's original concern was that waiting in tests for a simple prompt " > " (> ) could be unreliable if this substring somehow appears in the output of the test program and the suggestion was to use more specific patterns for the cases when the full prompt (thread_name[frame_index]) is not printed ( e.g. when the current thread is not set). However, we need somehow pass this pattern to Jdb.command(JdbCommand) method otherwise it would keep waiting for the full prompt and fail with the timeout. Probably I am missing something here... > Maybe we need a version of command() that takes a pattern to look for > other than the prompt. > > Chris > > > > > > Thanks! > > --Daniil > > > > On 10/19/18, 9:27 AM, "Daniil Titov" <daniil.x.ti...@oracle.com> wrote: > > > > Hi Gary and Chris, > > > > Below is the table that shows what jdb output is printed when a breakpoint is hit depending on what suspended policy is used: > > > > SUSPEND POLICY | PROMPT PRINTED | LOCATION PRINTED > > --------------------------------------- |---------------------------|-------------------------- > > SUSPEND_ALL. | yes, e.g. "main[1]" | yes > > --------------------------------------- |-------------------------- |-------------------------- > > SUSPEND_EVENT_THREAD | no | no > > ----------------------------------------|------------------------ --|-------------------------- > > SUSPEND_ALL. | no | no > > > > > > The fix changes this behavior as the following: > > > > SUSPEND POLICY | PROMPT PRINTED. | LOCATION PRINTED > > --------------------------------------- |----------------------------|-------------------------- > > SUSPEND_ALL. | yes , e.g. "main[1]" | yes > > --------------------------------------- |----------------------------|-------------------------- > > SUSPEND_EVENT_THREAD | yes , ">" | yes > > ----------------------------------------|--------------------------- |-------------------------- > > SUSPEND_ALL. | yes, ">". | yes > > > > Could you please say is it OK for you or you want that the location was printed only for SUSPEND_ALL case? Or probably just leave all behavior unchanged and close the bug as "not an issue"? > > > > Regarding settable prompt... As I understand Gary's original concern was that waiting in tests for a simple prompt " > " (> ) could be unreliable if this substring somehow appears in the output of the test program and the suggestion was to use more specific patterns for the cases when the full prompt (thread_name[frame_index]) is not printed ( e.g. when the current thread is not set). However, we need somehow pass this pattern to Jdb.command(JdbCommand) method otherwise it would keep waiting for the full prompt and fail with the timeout. Probably I am missing something here... > > > > > > Thanks! > > > > Best regards, > > Daniil > > > > > > > > On 10/19/18, 12:54 AM, "gary.ad...@oracle.com" <gary.ad...@oracle.com> wrote: > > > > It's not clear to me if the omitted location information for the non > > stopping > > cases was intentional or not. It may be sufficient to know that the > > event fired > > without the extra information. > > > > I don't think a settable prompt is required either. There are plenty of > > jdb commands that > > could be used with the wait for message in tests that need to > > synchronize at a specific > > point in the test sequence. > > > > I don't think we see wait for simple prompt in any of the tests, because it > > is not reliable enough. > > > > On 10/18/18 11:53 AM, Daniil Titov wrote: > > > Hi Gary, > > > > > > Currently when a breakpoint is hit the message "Breakpoint hit:" is printed in the debugger output. What we do in this fix we just add more information about what exact breakpoint is hit. Do you suggest we should not print this line at all if suspend policy is SUSPEND_NONE? If so then it is not clear what is the use of the command "stop go ..." would be. Regarding waiting for the simple prompt, we could change JDbCommand to have a field to store a prompt pattern and use this pattern (if it was set) when waiting for command to complete. In tests when required we would set the pattern in JdbCommand to more complicated one matching a specific output we are expecting at this particular step. Do you think it would be a better approach? > > > > > > Thanks! > > > > > > Best regards, > > > Daniil > > > > > > > > > > > > On 10/18/18, 4:09 AM, "Gary Adams" <gary.ad...@oracle.com> wrote: > > > > > > I'm not certain that we should be printing locations or prompts for > > > events when the vm has not been suspended. This looks OK for the > > > simple test case we are working on here, but in real life there may > > > be a lot more output produced. > > > > > > The user has to select a specific thread before additional commands > > > can be performed in the correct context. e.g. threads, thread n, where, ... > > > So the information is available to the user. It doesn't have to be > > > produced at the time the event is processed. > > > > > > I'm uncomfortable putting too much trust in waiting for the simple prompt, > > > because there is too great a chance of false positives on such a small > > > marker. > > > > > > > > > On 10/17/18, 8:50 PM, Daniil Titov wrote: > > > > Hi Chris, Alex and JC, > > > > > > > > I created a separate issue to deal with "non-atomic" jdb output at https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8212626 . > > > > > > > > Please review an updated fix that includes the changes Alex suggested. > > > > > > > > Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dtitov/8211736/webrev.04 > > > > Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8211736 > > > > > > > > Thanks! > > > > --Daniil > > > > > > > > > > > > On 10/17/18, 5:06 PM, "Daniil Titov"<daniil.x.ti...@oracle.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi Chris, > > > > > > > > The previous email was accidentally fired before I managed to type anything in. Sorry for confusion. > > > > > > > > Jdb constantly reads new commands from System.in despite whether the breakpoint is hit and/or the prompt is printed. > > > > > > > > cat -n src/jdk.jdi/share/classes/com/sun/tools/example/debug/tty/TTY.java > > > > > > > > 786 // Process interactive commands. > > > > 787 MessageOutput.printPrompt(); > > > > 788 while (true) { > > > > 789 String ln = in.readLine(); > > > > 790 if (ln == null) { > > > > 791 /* > > > > 792 * Jdb is being shutdown because debuggee exited, ignore any 'null' > > > > 793 * returned by readLine() during shutdown. JDK-8154144. > > > > 794 */ > > > > 795 if (!isShuttingDown()) { > > > > 796 MessageOutput.println("Input stream closed."); > > > > 797 } > > > > 798 ln = "quit"; > > > > 799 } > > > > 800 > > > > 801 if (ln.startsWith("!!")&& lastLine != null) { > > > > 802 ln = lastLine + ln.substring(2); > > > > 803 MessageOutput.printDirectln(ln);// Special case: use printDirectln() > > > > 804 } > > > > 805 > > > > 806 StringTokenizer t = new StringTokenizer(ln); > > > > 807 if (t.hasMoreTokens()) { > > > > 808 lastLine = ln; > > > > 809 executeCommand(t); > > > > 810 } else { > > > > 811 MessageOutput.printPrompt(); > > > > 812 } > > > > 813 } > > > > 814 } catch (VMDisconnectedException e) { > > > > 815 handler.handleDisconnectedException(); > > > > 816 } > > > > > > > > Below is a sample debug session for the following test class that sends commands "threads" and "quit" > > > > 1 public class LoopTest { > > > > 2 public static void main(String[] args) throws Exception { > > > > 3 Thread thread = Thread.currentThread(); > > > > 4 while(true) { > > > > 5 print(thread); > > > > 6 Thread.sleep(5000); > > > > 7 } > > > > 8 } > > > > 9 > > > > 10 public static void print(Object obj) { > > > > 11 //System.out.println(obj); > > > > 12 } > > > > 13 } > > > > > > > > datitov-mac:work datitov$ ~/src/jdk-hs/build/macosx-x64-debug/images/jdk/bin/jdb LoopTest > > > > Initializing jdb ... > > > > > stop go at LoopTest:6 > > > > Deferring breakpoint LoopTest:6. > > > > It will be set after the class is loaded. > > > > > run > > > > run LoopTest > > > > Set uncaught java.lang.Throwable > > > > Set deferred uncaught java.lang.Throwable > > > > > > > > > VM Started: Set deferred breakpoint LoopTest:6 > > > > > > > > Breakpoint hit: "thread=main", LoopTest.main(), line=6 bci=8 > > > > 6 Thread.sleep(5000); > > > > > > > > Breakpoint hit: "thread=main", LoopTest.main(), line=6 bci=8 > > > > 6 Thread.sleep(5000); > > > > threads > > > > Group system: > > > > (java.lang.ref.Reference$ReferenceHandler)0x172 Reference Handler running > > > > (java.lang.ref.Finalizer$FinalizerThread)0x173 Finalizer cond. waiting > > > > (java.lang.Thread)0x174 Signal Dispatcher running > > > > Group main: > > > > (java.lang.Thread)0x1 main sleeping > > > > Group InnocuousThreadGroup: > > > > (jdk.internal.misc.InnocuousThread)0x197 Common-Cleaner cond. waiting > > > > > > > > > Breakpoint hit: "thread=main", LoopTest.main(), line=6 bci=8 > > > > 6 Thread.sleep(5000); > > > > > > > > Breakpoint hit: "thread=main", LoopTest.main(), line=6 bci=8 > > > > 6 Thread.sleep(5000); > > > > quit > > > > Breakpoint hit: "thread=main", LoopTest.main(), line=6 bci=8 > > > > 6 Thread.sleep(5000); > > > > > > > > datitov-mac:work datitov$ > > > > > > > > I think we could print a simple prompt in this case as Alex suggested. > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > Daniil > > > > > > > > On 10/17/18, 3:52 PM, "Chris Plummer"<chris.plum...@oracle.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > What is the jdb state for a breakpoint with SUSPEND_NONE? Can you > > > > actually type in commands even though no threads are suspended? > > > > > > > > Chris > > > > > > > > On 10/17/18 3:31 PM, Alex Menkov wrote: > > > > > Hi Daniil, Chris, > > > > > > > > > > As far as I understand, the fix does not completely fixes all > > > > > "non-atomic" output issues (at least TTY.executeCommand still prints > > > > > prompt separately), so I agree that handle it as separate issue would > > > > > be better. > > > > > Unfortunately I don't know Gary's ideas for the issue. > > > > > > > > > > About the fix for print prompt: > > > > > 1) TTY.java: > > > > > + // Print current location if suspend policy is SUSPEND_NONE > > > > > I suppose you mean "Print breakpoint location" > > > > > > > > > > 2) Does it make sense to use printCurrentLocation for > > > > > SUSPEND_EVENT_THREAD? > > > > > Is it expected to print something different from printBreakpointLocation? > > > > > > > > > > 3) I don't quite understand why we don't print simple prompt for > > > > > SUSPEND_NONE. IIUC jdb can accept new command in both > > > > > SUSPEND_EVENT_THREAD and SUSPEND_NONE cases (prompt shows that jdb > > > > > waits for next command, right?) > > > > > > > > > > 4) JdbStopThreadTest.java > > > > > New line line in Java regexp is "\\R" > > > > > > > > > > --alex > > > > > > > > > > On 10/17/2018 10:47, Chris Plummer wrote: > > > > >> Hi Alex, > > > > >> > > > > >> I think the tty buffering should be a separate bug fix, and I'd also > > > > >> like input from Gary on it since he had tried something similar at > > > > >> one point. It should probably also include a multithread test to > > > > >> prove the fix is working (after first getting the test to fail > > > > >> without the changes). > > > > >> > > > > >> thanks, > > > > >> > > > > >> Chris > > > > >> > > > > >> On 10/16/18 8:59 PM, Daniil Titov wrote: > > > > >>> Hi Alex, Chris and JC, > > > > >>> > > > > >>> Please review an updated version of the patch that addresses these > > > > >>> issues. > > > > >>> > > > > >>> Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dtitov/8211736/webrev.03/ > > > > >>> Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8211736 > > > > >>> > > > > >>> Thanks! > > > > >>> --Daniil > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> On 10/12/18, 9:52 AM, "Alex Menkov"<alexey.men...@oracle.com> wrote: > > > > >>> > > > > >>> Hi Daniil, > > > > >>> 1) +1 for printCurrentLocation when suspendPolicy != SUSPEND_ALL > > > > >>> 2) wrong indent in JdbStopThreadTest.java: > > > > >>> 36 import lib.jdb.JdbCommand; > > > > >>> 37 import lib.jdb.JdbTest; > > > > >>> 3) I think it would be better to make waitForSimplePrompt > > > > >>> property of > > > > >>> JdbCommand (like JdbCommand.allowExit) > > > > >>> jdb.command(JdbCommand.run().replyIsSimplePrompt()); > > > > >>> looks much clearer than > > > > >>> jdb.command(JdbCommand.run(), true); > > > > >>> 4) (TTY.java) > > > > >>> MessageOutput.lnprint("Breakpoint hit:"); > > > > >>> + // Print current location and prompt if suspend policy is > > > > >>> SUSPEND_EVENT_THREAD. > > > > >>> + // In case of SUSPEND_ALL policy this is handled by > > > > >>> vmInterrupted() > > > > >>> method. > > > > >>> + if (be.request().suspendPolicy() == > > > > >>> EventRequest.SUSPEND_EVENT_THREAD) { > > > > >>> + printCurrentLocation(ThreadInfo.getThreadInfo(be.thread())); > > > > >>> + MessageOutput.printPrompt(); > > > > >>> + } > > > > >>> We have 3 separate outputs. > > > > >>> If we have several concurrent threads, we can easy get mess of > > > > >>> outputs > > > > >>> from different threads. > > > > >>> I think it would be better to print everything in a single chunk. > > > > >>> I suppose TTY has other places with similar "non-atomic" > > > > >>> output, so > > > > >>> maybe revising TTY output should be handled by separate issue. > > > > >>> --alex > > > > >>> On 10/11/2018 22:00, Chris Plummer wrote: > > > > >>> > Hi Daniil, > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > Can you send output from an example jdb session? > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > Do you think maybe we should also call printCurrentLocation() > > > > >>> when the > > > > >>> > suspend policy is NONE? > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > There's a typo in the following line. The space is on the > > > > >>> wrong side of > > > > >>> > the comma. > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > 72 jdb.command(JdbCommand.stopThreadAt(DEBUGGEE_CLASS > > > > >>> ,bpLine)); > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > thanks, > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > Chris > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > On 10/11/18 8:02 PM, Daniil Titov wrote: > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> >> Thank you, JC! > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> >> Please review an updated version of the patch that fixes > > > > >>> newly added > > > > >>> >> test for Windows platform (now it uses system dependent line > > > > >>> >> separator string). > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> >> Webrev:http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dtitov/8211736/webrev.02/ > > > > >>> >> <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Edtitov/8211736/webrev.02/> > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> >> Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8211736 > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> >> Best regards, > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> >> --Daniil > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> >> *From: *JC Beyler<jcbey...@google.com> > > > > >>> >> *Date: *Thursday, October 11, 2018 at 7:17 PM > > > > >>> >> *To: *<daniil.x.ti...@oracle.com> > > > > >>> >> *Cc: *<serviceability-dev@openjdk.java.net> > > > > >>> >> *Subject: *Re: RFR 8211736: jdb doesn't print prompt when > > > > >>> breakpoint > > > > >>> >> is hit and suspend policy is STOP_EVENT_THREAD > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> >> Hi Daniil, > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> >> Looks good to me. I saw a really small nit: > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dtitov/8211736/webrev.01/test/jdk/com/sun/jdi/JdbStopThreadTest.java.html > > > > >>> > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Edtitov/8211736/webrev.01/test/jdk/com/sun/jdi/JdbStopThreadTest.java.html> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> >> 70 jdb.command(JdbCommand.stopThreadAt( DEBUGGEE_CLASS > > > > >>> ,bpLine)); > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> >> There is a space after the '('. > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> >> No need to send a new webrev for that evidently :), > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> >> Jc > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> >> On Thu, Oct 11, 2018 at 5:07 PM Daniil Titov > > > > >>> >> <daniil.x.ti...@oracle.com > > > > >>> <mailto:daniil.x.ti...@oracle.com>> wrote: > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> >> Please review the change that fixes the issue with > > > > >>> missing prompt > > > > >>> >> in jdb when a breakpoint is hit and the suspend policy > > > > >>> is set to > > > > >>> >> stop the thread only. > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> >> Webrev: > > > > >>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dtitov/8211736/webrev.01 > > > > >>> >> <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Edtitov/8211736/webrev.01> > > > > >>> >> Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8211736 > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> >> Thanks! > > > > >>> >> --Daniil > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> >> -- > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> >> Thanks, > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> >> Jc > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
