RFR: 8359820: Improve handshake/safepoint timeout diagnostic messages [v8]

[Anton Artemov]

On Wed, 6 Aug 2025 09:08:01 GMT, Aleksey Shipilev <shade at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Anton Artemov has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge or a rebase. The incremental webrev excludes the unrelated changes brought in by the merge/rebase. The pull request contains 17 additional commits since the last revision:
>> 
>>  - 8359820: Addressed reviewer's comments
>>  - Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/master' into JDK-8359820-SIGILL-with-low-handshake-timeout-on-intel-sde
>>  - 8359820: Addressed reviewer's comments
>>  - 8359820: Addressed reviewer's comments
>>  - Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/master' into JDK-8359820-SIGILL-with-low-handshake-timeout-on-intel-sde
>>  - 8359820: Fixed spaces
>>  - 8359820: Addressed reviewer's comments
>>  - 8359820: Addressed reviewer's comments
>>  - 8359820: Addressed reviewer's comments
>>  - Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/master' into JDK-8359820-SIGILL-with-low-handshake-timeout-on-intel-sde
>>  - ... and 7 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/ecbb76bf...d85769af
>
> src/hotspot/share/utilities/vmError.cpp line 107:
> 
>> 105: const size_t      VMError::_reattempt_required_stack_headroom = 64 * K;
>> 106: const intptr_t    VMError::segfault_address = pd_segfault_address;
>> 107: volatile intptr_t VMError::_handshake_timed_out_thread = p2i(nullptr);
> 
> Not sure why we do `intptr_t` if we only ever expect real `Thread*` here? Would avoid doing awkward `p2i` conversions in comparisons.

Thanks, created a separate issue for that.

> src/hotspot/share/utilities/vmError.cpp line 825:
> 
>> 823:       if (_siginfo != nullptr && os::signal_sent_by_kill(_siginfo)) {
>> 824:         if (_handshake_timed_out_thread == p2i(_thread)) {
>> 825:           st->print(" (sent by handshake timeout handler");
> 
> Looks like this message misses the closing parenthesis? `(sent by kill)`, but `(sent by handshake timeout handler`.

Thanks, created a separate issue for that.

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/26309#discussion_r2256564220
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/26309#discussion_r2256564447