On Mon, 8 Jul 2024 12:13:07 GMT, Axel Boldt-Christmas
wrote:
>> When inflating a monitor the `ObjectMonitor*` is written directly over the
>> `markWord` and any overwritten data is displaced into a displaced
>> `markWord`. This is problematic for concurrent GCs which needs extra care or
>> lo
On Mon, 8 Jul 2024 08:18:42 GMT, Axel Boldt-Christmas
wrote:
> When inflating a monitor the `ObjectMonitor*` is written directly over the
> `markWord` and any overwritten data is displaced into a displaced `markWord`.
> This is problematic for concurrent GCs which needs extra care or looser
>
On Mon, 8 Jul 2024 08:18:42 GMT, Axel Boldt-Christmas
wrote:
> When inflating a monitor the `ObjectMonitor*` is written directly over the
> `markWord` and any overwritten data is displaced into a displaced `markWord`.
> This is problematic for concurrent GCs which needs extra care or looser
>
On Wed, 20 Dec 2023 10:40:23 GMT, Serguei Spitsyn wrote:
>>> You can't do this! The Java code knows nothing about JVM TI being
>>> enabled/disabled and will call this function unconditionally.
>>
>> Indeed. I wonder if anyone is testing minimal builds to catch issues like
>> this.
>
> Good cat
On Wed, 15 Feb 2023 20:31:14 GMT, Brian Goetz wrote:
>> Strahinja Stanojevic has updated the pull request incrementally with one
>> additional commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Remove address from lambda class names in test on the 32-bit architecture
>> too
>
> David Llloyd's proposed so
On Mon, 21 Nov 2022 16:46:43 GMT, Strahinja Stanojevic wrote:
>> This PR introduces an option to output stable names for the lambda classes
>> in the JDK. A stable name consists of two parts: The first part is the
>> predefined value `$$Lambda$` appended to the lambda capturing class, and the
