On Fri, 10 Jul 2026 17:38:21 GMT, Chris Plummer <[email protected]> wrote:

>> test/hotspot/jtreg/vmTestbase/nsk/jdi/EventRequestManager/threadStartRequests/thrstartreq001.java
>>  line 226:
>> 
>>> 224:                         // events until there are no more. So do a 
>>> continue here rather than
>>> 225:                         // allowing continuing to be conditional on 
>>> isConnected below.
>>> 226:                         continue;
>> 
>> Q: Execution is already at the end of loop cycle.
>> The `continue;` at line 226 is confusing and misleading. Why do we need it?
>
> Yeah, that's a bug. I was thinking that a "continue" here would skip the 
> "isConnected" check below, but that is not the case. I think the reason my 
> changes still seem to resolve the bug is because of the above change to not 
> check "isConnected" before doing the eventSet.resume(). This appears to have 
> addressed the common case of events not being processed. However, my intent 
> with doing the continue should still be addressed somehow. Hypothetically 
> there could still be more events to process. I'll need to restructure the 
> loop to do this.

It's fixed now.

-------------

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/31756#discussion_r3561724276

Reply via email to