On Wed, 16 Jul 2025 00:26:16 GMT, Alex Menkov <amen...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> Fix how ThreadReference.popFrame() and ThreadReference.forceEarlyReturn deal >> with JDWP OPAQUE_FRAME error. >> >> Before virtual threads, OpaqueFrameException did not exist and these API >> always threw NativeMethodException when JDWP OPAQUE_FRAME error was >> returned. For virtual threads OpaqueFrameException was added to handle the >> case where a virtual thread was not suspended at an event, so the JDI >> implementation was updated to throw OpaqueFrameException if it detected that >> a native method was not the cause. It turns out however that JVMTI (and >> therefore JDWP) can return OPAQUE_FRAME error for reasons other than a >> native method or the special virtual thread case, and for platform threads >> we were incorrectly throwing NativeMethodException in these cases. This PR >> fixes that. For platform threads we now only throw NativeMethodException if >> a native method is detected, and otherwise throw OpaqueFrameException. >> >> The spec language is also being cleaned up to better align with JVMTI. >> Rather than calling out all the reasons for OpaqueFrameException, a more >> generic explanation is given. >> >> This is somewhat of a preliminary PR so I can get some feedback. I still >> need to do a CR and complete testing. > > src/jdk.jdi/share/classes/com/sun/tools/jdi/StackFrameImpl.java line 401: > >> 399: // previous frame is native, in which case we throw >> NativeMethodException >> 400: for (int i = 0; i < 2; i++) { >> 401: StackFrameImpl sf; > > There is nothing implementation-specific here. > I'd suggest to: > - `StackFrameImpl` -> `StackFrame`; > - `MethodImpl` -> `Method`; > - remove `validateStackFrame` at line 408 ('MethodImpl.location()' calls it) Are you suggesting renaming the classes? This is a pretty conventional naming when you have classes implementing a spec defined in an interface class. There are a lot more than just StackFrame and Method that are doing this. ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/26335#discussion_r2209018611