On Wed, 10 Jul 2024 05:48:23 GMT, David Holmes <dhol...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> I'm not so sure this is in fact a bug. If we are throwing with a cause, but >> we can't actually throw and so will do vm_exit, then the exception of >> interest is the cause not the more generic exception that would otherwise >> contain the cause. >> >> Though I have to wonder why there is not an original `_throw` for the >> "cause" exception, that would have triggered the special_exception handling >> anyway? > > Though I see this is inconsistent with `Exceptions::_throw_msg_cause` Okay I think I see how the logic works. If we were going to abort we would never reach `_throw_cause` as the initial `_throw` would have exited. But for the `!thread->can_call_Java()` case the original `_throw` would replace the intended real exception with the dummy `VM_exception()`, which is then "caught" and we try to replace with a more specific exception to be thrown via `throw_cause`, which will again replace whichever exception is requested with the dummy `VM_exception()` - so the end result is we will throw the dummy regardless of whether the cause or wrapping exception is specified. So your fix here makes sense. ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/20083#discussion_r1671680471
