Skip to content

Conversation

@plummercj
Copy link
Contributor

@plummercj plummercj commented Apr 28, 2025

In an effort go get rid of calls to Debugee.threadByName() or Debugee.threadByNameOrThrow(), I found that many tests store the thread being looked up in a static field of the debuggee. The test can fetch the ThreadReference from the static field instead of looking it up using APIs that rely on vm.allThreads().

Most of the changes take advantage of the following common pattern:

In the debugger:

String          threadName1 = "thread1";
thread1 = debuggee.threadByNameOrThrow(threadName1);

In the debuggee:

static Thread thread1 = null;
thread1 = JDIThreadFactory.newThread(new Thread1addcountfilter001a("thread1"));

Note that the static field name for the Thread is the same as the thread name. Thus we can easily switch from looking up by thread name to instead looking up by static field name since they both use the same name.


Progress

  • Change must be properly reviewed (1 review required, with at least 1 Reviewer)
  • Change must not contain extraneous whitespace
  • Commit message must refer to an issue

Issue

  • JDK-8355773: Some nsk/jdi tests can fetch ThreadReference from static field in the debuggee (Enhancement - P4)

Reviewers

Reviewing

Using git

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/24935/head:pull/24935
$ git checkout pull/24935

Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/24935
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/24935/head

Using Skara CLI tools

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 24935

View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 24935

Using diff file

Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/24935.diff

Using Webrev

Link to Webrev Comment

@bridgekeeper
Copy link

bridgekeeper bot commented Apr 28, 2025

👋 Welcome back cjplummer! A progress list of the required criteria for merging this PR into master will be added to the body of your pull request. There are additional pull request commands available for use with this pull request.

@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Apr 28, 2025

@plummercj This change now passes all automated pre-integration checks.

ℹ️ This project also has non-automated pre-integration requirements. Please see the file CONTRIBUTING.md for details.

After integration, the commit message for the final commit will be:

8355773: Some nsk/jdi tests can fetch ThreadReference from static field in the debuggee

Reviewed-by: sspitsyn, amenkov

You can use pull request commands such as /summary, /contributor and /issue to adjust it as needed.

At the time when this comment was updated there had been 75 new commits pushed to the master branch:

As there are no conflicts, your changes will automatically be rebased on top of these commits when integrating. If you prefer to avoid this automatic rebasing, please check the documentation for the /integrate command for further details.

➡️ To integrate this PR with the above commit message to the master branch, type /integrate in a new comment.

@openjdk openjdk bot changed the title 8355773 8355773: Some nsk/jdi tests can fetch ThreadReference from static field in the debuggee Apr 28, 2025
@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Apr 28, 2025

@plummercj The following label will be automatically applied to this pull request:

  • serviceability

When this pull request is ready to be reviewed, an "RFR" email will be sent to the corresponding mailing list. If you would like to change these labels, use the /label pull request command.

@openjdk openjdk bot added the serviceability serviceability-dev@openjdk.org label Apr 28, 2025

case 0:
ThreadReference thread = debuggee.threadByNameOrThrow(methodName);
ThreadReference thread = debuggee.mainThread();
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is one that was missed during the PR for #24867.

Comment on lines +80 to +81
static final int lineForBreakInThread = 141;
static final int[] checkedLines = { 142, 142, 182 };
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Note the added lines in the debuggee below.

Comment on lines +80 to +82
static final int lineForBreakInThread = 149;
static final int[] checkedLines = { 163, 163, 196 };
static final int[] checkedLinesAlt = { 164, 164, 196 };
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Note the added lines in the debuggee below.

@plummercj plummercj marked this pull request as ready for review April 29, 2025 17:42
@openjdk openjdk bot added the rfr Pull request is ready for review label Apr 29, 2025
@mlbridge
Copy link

mlbridge bot commented Apr 29, 2025

Webrevs

Copy link
Contributor

@sspitsyn sspitsyn left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good.

@openjdk openjdk bot added the ready Pull request is ready to be integrated label Apr 29, 2025
@plummercj
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thank you for the review Alex and Serguei!

/integrate

@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Apr 30, 2025

Going to push as commit 50145bb.
Since your change was applied there have been 87 commits pushed to the master branch:

Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts.

@openjdk openjdk bot added the integrated Pull request has been integrated label Apr 30, 2025
@openjdk openjdk bot closed this Apr 30, 2025
@openjdk openjdk bot removed ready Pull request is ready to be integrated rfr Pull request is ready for review labels Apr 30, 2025
@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Apr 30, 2025

@plummercj Pushed as commit 50145bb.

💡 You may see a message that your pull request was closed with unmerged commits. This can be safely ignored.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

integrated Pull request has been integrated serviceability serviceability-dev@openjdk.org

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants