RFR: 6588467: Add isDaemon() and getPriority() to ThreadInfo

[Staffan Larsen]

I have submitted the CCC request. Will get back to this thread with the results.

/Staffan

> On 10 feb 2015, at 22:08, Martin Buchholz <martinrb at google.com> wrote:
> 
> I'm not a serviceability engineer, but I reviewed this change and it seems fine to me.  Can someone from Oracle please shepherd through CCC?
> 
> On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 4:51 PM, Jeremy Manson <jeremymanson at google.com <mailto:jeremymanson at google.com>> wrote:
> Thanks for taking a look, Staffan.  Sorry about the delay.  I've gone ahead and made a test:
> 
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jmanson/6588467/webrev.01/ <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jmanson/6588467/webrev.01/>
> 
> Can anyone drive the API process?  It's such a minor change that I can't imagine it wouldn't go through easily.  Of course, I have no idea what's involved.
> 
> Jeremy
> 
> On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 11:10 PM, Staffan Larsen <staffan.larsen at oracle.com <mailto:staffan.larsen at oracle.com>> wrote:
> 
> > On 13 jan 2015, at 06:28, David Holmes <david.holmes at oracle.com <mailto:david.holmes at oracle.com>> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Jeremy,
> >
> > On 13/01/2015 4:32 AM, Jeremy Manson wrote:
> >> Hi folks,
> >>
> >> This was long forgotten, seems to have been lost in the shuffle.  I've
> >> done it, since we could use it, too:
> >>
> >> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-6588467 <https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-6588467>
> >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jmanson/6588467/webrev.00/ <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jmanson/6588467/webrev.00/>
> >
> > Codewise this all appears fine to me.
> 
> Thanks for doing this. I have only scanned the code, but did not see any test. Could you please add tests for the new API?
> 
> >> Since it is an API change (albeit an uncontroversial one), it will have
> >> to go through whatever the super-secret API change review process is
> >> that you folks do.
> >
> > Not sure if this just needs an API tweak or a JMX spec revision. If the latter then this might be a big deal. But I'll leave that to the official serviceability folk :)
> 
> No spec revision is needed, same process as for all API changes. Unfortunately I don’t have the time to drive that, so hoping someone else can jump in.
> 
> /Staffan
> 
> >
> > Cheers,
> > David
> >
> >> Thanks!
> >>
> >> Jeremy
> 
> 
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/serviceability-dev/attachments/20150216/64ecd784/attachment.html>