RFR: 8300575: JVMTI support when using alternative virtual thread implementation [v7]

Sat Feb 18 07:59:29 UTC 2023

On Fri, 17 Feb 2023 19:54:08 GMT, Patricio Chilano Mateo <pchilanomate at openjdk.org> wrote:

> Yes, we could do that. Although I think that checking for BoundVirtualThread_klass is more descriptive of what we are trying to do and will be less confusing when reading the code. How about checking for `(!VMContinuations && x->is_a(vmClasses::BaseVirtualThread_klass()))`?

We can go with what you have for now and re-visit again if it becomes an issue. The main thing I had hoped is that the VM won't get too coupled to BoundVirtualThread as that may move or be refactored soon.

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

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/12512