On Wed, 12 Nov 2025 20:04:19 GMT, Daniel D. Daugherty <[email protected]> wrote:
>> test/hotspot/jtreg/serviceability/jvmti/SuspendWithObjectMonitorWait/SuspendWithObjectMonitorWait.java >> line 372: >> >>> 370: // - a threadLock enter in the resumer thread >>> 371: // - resumption of the waiter thread >>> 372: // - a threadLock enter in the freshly resumed waiter >>> thread >> >> This list of step tests is identical to the list on L490 -> L493 and the >> original llist on L256 -> L259. >> >> This step comment: >> `370: // - a threadLock enter in the resumer thread` >> should be updated to something like: >> >> // - a blocked threadLock enter in the resumer thread while the >> // threadLock is held by the main thread. >> >> >> This change of threadLock scope also requires this update from: >> >> 605: // - tries to grab the threadLock (should not block!) >> >> >> to: >> >> 605: // - tries to grab the threadLock (should not block with >> doWork1!) > > I can't figure out why we're delaying the resumer thread in `doWork2`. Update: I figured this out. See the new doWork2 transaction diagram. >> test/hotspot/jtreg/serviceability/jvmti/SuspendWithObjectMonitorWait/SuspendWithObjectMonitorWait.java >> line 493: >> >>> 491: // - a threadLock enter in the resumer thread >>> 492: // - resumption of the waiter thread >>> 493: // - a threadLock enter in the freshly resumed waiter >>> thread >> >> This list of step tests is identical to the list on L369 -> L372 and the >> original llist on L256 -> L259. >> >> This step comment: >> >> 491: // - a threadLock enter in the resumer thread >> >> should be updated to something like: >> >> // - a blocked threadLock enter in the resumer thread while the >> // threadLock is held by the main thread. > > I can't figure out why we're delaying the resumer thread in `doWork3`. Update: I figured this out. See the new doWork3 transaction diagram. ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/27040#discussion_r2524860241 PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/27040#discussion_r2524872816
