Thank you, Chris, I will fix this typo before pushing the change in the repository.
Best regards, Daniil On 4/5/19, 11:18 PM, "Chris Plummer" <[email protected]> wrote: [I just realized I had typed this up a day or two ago and never sent it] +1, except there is a typo on the following line: </ew> 54 * was started with <em>-m</em> or <em>--module</ew> option the method returns thanks, Chris On 4/3/19 5:23 PM, David Holmes wrote: > Hi Daniil, > > This seems reasonable, but can we add a suitable regression test > please to verify behaviour before JDK-8205654 and with this fix. > > Thanks, > David > > On 4/04/2019 5:02 am, Daniil Titov wrote: >> Please review the change that makes jcmd process name matching on >> Linux platform consistent with pre-existing behavior. >> >> On other platforms (and on Linux platform before changes [3]) the >> jcmd uses system property "sun.rt.javaCommand" (see >> sun.jvmstat.monitor. MonitoredVmUtil.mainClass(MonitoredVm, boolean) >> that is called from sun.tools.common. ProcessArgumentMatcher at line >> 96) and treats the part before the first space as a main class when >> matching the process name. However, if the application is started >> with -jar option this part contains the path to the jar file. If -m >> or --module option is used this part contains the module name and the >> main class (if the main class was specified in the command line) in >> the format <modulename>/<mainclass>. After changes [3] , on Linux >> platform the proc filesystem is used to find a Java process, however, >> it always matches the process name against the main class regardless >> what options were used to launch the application. This created >> discrepancies between old and new behavior on Linux platform as well >> as between behavior on Linux and other platforms. Th! >> e fix changes sun.tool.ProcessHelper (that was introduced in [3]) >> to correct these discrepancies. >> >> >> Reference: >> [1] Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dtitov/8221730/webrev.01 >> [2] Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8221730 >> [3] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8205654 >> >> >> Thanks! >> --Daniil >> >>
