On Wed, 22 Jul 2026 02:08:22 GMT, David Holmes <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Thanks for looking at this Patricio. >> >> The issues you raise were discussed a lot when JDK-8355631 was being fixed >> (initially it only dealt with the late phase change problem). The problem, >> as I understand it, is that in-progress callbacks can generate further >> events which are then happening after vm_death - contrary to spec. But >> without full synchronization it is inherently racy and you can't get 100% >> compliance. The current polling loop for 60s is a compromise, but we/I >> overlooked the interaction with safepoints. It is very easy to get into a >> temporary "deadlock" with safepoints, hence the simple point fix here. > > There is another self-hang reported in > [JDK-8385823](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8385823) > but my reading of the JVMTI spec is that VMDeath guarantees no new events > occur after it, I did not review JDK-8355631 so I don't know if we considered using an atomic flag to prevent the posting of further events once we reach VMDeath. We cannot do anything reasonable about in-progress callbacks, but we could also check the same atomic flag in the code that invokes the callbacks to return when the atomic flag is set... ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/31982#discussion_r3631331958
