On Mon, 23 Jun 2025 10:39:59 GMT, Anton Artemov <d...@openjdk.org> wrote:

>> test/hotspot/jtreg/runtime/Monitor/StressWrapper_TestRecursiveLocking_36M.java
>>  line 36:
>> 
>>> 34:  *     -XX:+UnlockDiagnosticVMOptions -XX:+WhiteBoxAPI
>>> 35:  *     -Xint
>>> 36:  *     -XX:LockingMode=0
>> 
>> I was wondering why these LockingMode=0 test cases were not setting 
>> `VerifyHeavyMonitors` instead, but I'm assuming the intent now is that we 
>> will only test that mode when it is set externally by the user (or in our 
>> case a particular test task definition)?
>> 
>> I also realized we can only test heavy monitors in tests where we explicitly 
>> control the monitor creation places and hence can call the WB method to 
>> force inflation. That obviously reduces the test coverage for that mode 
>> quite significantly - but perhaps that will be handled if in the future we 
>> implicitly reenable forced inflation and do away with the WB usage.
>
> My understanding is that VerifyHeavyMonitors requires LockingMode = 0, see 
> line 1852 of arguments.cpp. So one has to set both at the same time, not one 
> instead of another. Now locking mode is hardcoded to lightweight, and there 
> is no way to use the incompatible `VerifyHeavyMonitors` option.

My understanding was that `VerifyHeavyMonitors` was to be used as a replacement 
for `LockingMode=0` aka `UseHeavyMonitors`. But as Coleen has requested all 
`VerifyHeavyMonitors` testing be removed this is now a moot point.

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/25847#discussion_r2162866307

Reply via email to