On Mon, 10 Nov 2025 19:21:11 GMT, Daniel D. Daugherty <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Anton Artemov has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a >> merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains 18 commits: >> >> - Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/master' into >> JDK-8366659-OM-wait-suspend-deadlock >> - 8366659: Added a comment to a boolean arg for enter() >> - Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/master' into >> JDK-8366659-OM-wait-suspend-deadlock >> - Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/master' into >> JDK-8366659-OM-wait-suspend-deadlock >> - 8366659: Fixed new lines. >> - Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/master' into >> JDK-8366659-OM-wait-suspend-deadlock >> - 8366659: Removed incorrect assert, >> - 8366659: Fixed merge conflict >> - 8366659: Fixed whitespace. >> - 8366659: Disabled posting JVMTI events in reenter-etner path of wait. >> Postponed waited event. >> - ... and 8 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/79fee607...31482ba4 > > src/hotspot/share/runtime/objectMonitor.cpp line 1108: > >> 1106: assert(currentNode->_thread == current, "invariant"); >> 1107: assert(_waiters > 0, "invariant"); >> 1108: assert_mark_word_consistency(); > > Why remove call to `assert_mark_word_consistency();`? Same question from me. :) > src/hotspot/share/runtime/objectMonitor.cpp line 1186: > >> 1184: // Current has acquired the lock -- Unlink current from the >> _entry_list. >> 1185: assert(has_owner(current), "invariant"); >> 1186: assert_mark_word_consistency(); > > Why remove call to `assert_mark_word_consistency();`? Same question from me. :) ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/27040#discussion_r2513824738 PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/27040#discussion_r2513824235
