From tramchamploo at gmail.com Tue Aug 15 06:57:57 2017 From: tramchamploo at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?B?6L2m5q2m5aOr?=) Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2017 02:57:57 -0400 Subject: Why is my benchmark blocked? Message-ID: Here java.lang.Thread.State: WAITING (parking) at sun.misc.Unsafe.park(Native Method) - parking to wait for <0x00000007ae289048> (a java.util.concurrent.CountDownLatch$Sync) at java.util.concurrent.locks.LockSupport.park(LockSupport.java:175) at java.util.concurrent.locks.AbstractQueuedSynchronizer.parkAndCheckInterrupt(AbstractQueuedSynchronizer.java:836) at java.util.concurrent.locks.AbstractQueuedSynchronizer.doAcquireSharedInterruptibly(AbstractQueuedSynchronizer.java:997) at java.util.concurrent.locks.AbstractQueuedSynchronizer.acquireSharedInterruptibly(AbstractQueuedSynchronizer.java:1304) at java.util.concurrent.CountDownLatch.await(CountDownLatch.java:231) at org.openjdk.jmh.runner.InfraControl.preTearDown(InfraControl.java:90) From henri.tremblay at gmail.com Tue Aug 15 11:37:17 2017 From: henri.tremblay at gmail.com (Henri Tremblay) Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2017 07:37:17 -0400 Subject: Why is my benchmark blocked? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi, A bit of context would be nice. Like the actual test and the JMH version. You are stuck on a latch so the part that was supposed to count down didn't. I haven't look at the code to see what can cause that yet. Henri On 15 August 2017 at 02:57, ??? wrote: > Here > > java.lang.Thread.State: WAITING (parking) > at sun.misc.Unsafe.park(Native Method) > - parking to wait for <0x00000007ae289048> (a > java.util.concurrent.CountDownLatch$Sync) > at java.util.concurrent.locks.LockSupport.park(LockSupport. > java:175) > at java.util.concurrent.locks.AbstractQueuedSynchronizer. > parkAndCheckInterrupt(AbstractQueuedSynchronizer.java:836) > at java.util.concurrent.locks.AbstractQueuedSynchronizer. > doAcquireSharedInterruptibly(AbstractQueuedSynchronizer.java:997) > at java.util.concurrent.locks.AbstractQueuedSynchronizer. > acquireSharedInterruptibly(AbstractQueuedSynchronizer.java:1304) > at java.util.concurrent.CountDownLatch.await( > CountDownLatch.java:231) > at org.openjdk.jmh.runner.InfraControl.preTearDown( > InfraControl.java:90) > From comp1986 at gmail.com Tue Aug 15 13:50:14 2017 From: comp1986 at gmail.com (Sergey Zaytsev) Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2017 16:50:14 +0300 Subject: Welcome to the "jmh-dev" mailing list In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <0BCA2238-61CD-4105-896B-4FAFD06A2799@gmail.com> comp1986 at gmail.com > On 15 Aug 2017, at 16:51, jmh-dev-request at openjdk.java.net wrote: > > jmh-dev at openjdk.java.net From brunodepaulak at yahoo.com.br Sun Aug 20 23:19:56 2017 From: brunodepaulak at yahoo.com.br (Bruno P. Kinoshita) Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2017 23:19:56 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [PATCH] Typo in org.openjdk.jmh.annotations.Param javadoc References: <1558123169.1727323.1503271196751.ref@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1558123169.1727323.1503271196751@mail.yahoo.com> Hi, Found a trivial typo in org.openjdk.jmh.annotations.Param's javadoc. Patch attached, and also copied below (not sure if the mailing list supports attachments). diff -r a128fd4a5901 jmh-core/src/main/java/org/openjdk/jmh/annotations/Param.java --- a/jmh-core/src/main/java/org/openjdk/jmh/annotations/Param.java???? Wed Jun 07 15:19:29 2017 +0200 +++ b/jmh-core/src/main/java/org/openjdk/jmh/annotations/Param.java???? Mon Aug 21 10:32:01 2017 +1200 @@ -34,7 +34,7 @@ ??*

Marks the configurable parameter in the benchmark.

??* ??*

{@link Param} fields should be non-final fields, - * and should only reside in in {@link State} classes. JMH will inject + * and should only reside in {@link State} classes. JMH will inject ??* the value into the annotated field before any {@link Setup} method ??* is called. It is not guaranteed the field value would be accessible ??* in any initializer or any constructor of {@link State}.

Thanks Bruno