On Fri, 12 Jul 2024 17:02:56 GMT, Chris Plummer <cjplum...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> The original code had 2 vm.resume() - one on them to match vm.suspend() and >> 2nd one to allow debugee to continue on error. >> Now we have 3 vm.resume() - one is to match vm.suspend() (line 377) and 2 >> conditional (on error). >> Theoretically we can get an error when both vm and thread2 are suspended, so >> 2 vm.resume() looks reasonable. >> Anyway resume() is a nop if the thread is not suspended > > After reaching the 2nd breakpoint, which suspends thread2, we do a > vm.suspend(), which bumps the thread2 suspendCount to 2. However, we do a > eventSet.resume() after this, lowering the suspendCount to 1, and there is no > error bailout point while the suspendCount is 2. Thus only 1 vm.resume() is > needed in the error handling. I think all this discussion about the number of `vm.resume()` calls that are needed or not needed and the fact that one of those `vm.resume()` calls could be replaced by a thread2.resume() call _perfectly_ illustrates just how complicated this test is. Thanks for going thru the effort to get rid of the `sleep()` call. I appreciate it. ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/20088#discussion_r1676519121
