On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 00:57:48 GMT, Yasumasa Suenaga <ysuen...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> That looks fine, although I'm a little unclear about the need for >> `--disableregistry`, and how that applies to existing code. >> >> Also, I think a bit of explanation of `[:registryport]` is needed since it >> is not also specified by the `jhsdb debugd` command. That's just the port >> that it chooses to communicate over, and can be any available port, right? >> If one is not specified, what port is chosen, and what would be a reason >> that you would want to specify a port? > >> That looks fine, although I'm a little unclear about the need for >> `--disableregistry`, and how that applies to existing code. > > We can use it when we want to register SA endpoint to RMI registry that > exists (e.g. rmid). I think it is simple to proxy to > `sun.jvm.hotspot.rmi.startRegistry` like `--registryport` option in jhsdb. > > https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/master/src/jdk.hotspot.agent/share/classes/sun/jvm/hotspot/SALauncher.java#L392-L400 > >> Also, I think a bit of explanation of `[:registryport]` is needed since it >> is not also specified by the `jhsdb debugd` command. That's just the port >> that it chooses to communicate over, and can be any available port, right? >> If one is not specified, what port is chosen, and what would be a reason >> that you would want to specify a port? > > We can specify any available port as you said. > For example, if we run multiple debugd instances on same OS, we need to use > different port. We can use `--registryport` and `[:registryport]` in that > case. > However we will not have many opportunities to use this. I think the default rmi registry port is 1099. However, do we need to also support something like [JDK-8196729](https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8196729) for the rmi communications port? ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/3000
