You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@harmony.apache.org by Alexei Fedotov <al...@gmail.com> on 2009/12/16 13:05:29 UTC

Re: patch OK?

[added dev@]

Egor,
Thanks for asking for review. I miss code exercises. The code looks
ok. BTW, the review took me here [1] - thanks Google for the wonderful
instrument.

As for your last question, TI appeared in java earlier than
java.lang.instrument. This means implementing the latter using the
former may make some sense.

[1] http://www.google.com/codesearch/p?hl=ru#TasP9sO-cIM/trunk/vm/vmcore/src/jvmti/jvmti.cpp&q=load_agentlib&exact_package=http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/harmony/enhanced/drlvm/



On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 3:03 PM, Egor Pasko <eg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Alexey, can you, please, review this patch?
>
> issue: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-6399
>
>
> I really like the idea of enabling -javaagent, but I am not sure that
> it should go through TI ...
>
> --
> Egor Pasko
>



-- 
With best regards / с наилучшими пожеланиями,
Alexei Fedotov / Алексей Федотов,
http://www.telecom-express.ru/
http://harmony.apache.org/
http://www.expressaas.com/
http://openmeetings.googlecode.com/

Re: patch OK?

Posted by Alexei Fedotov <al...@gmail.com>.
Egor, I share your concern.

Ever changing nature of today's world implies that optimizing JIT have
to be aware of JVMTI, though I cannot request implementing that from
the patch author.




On Sat, Dec 19, 2009 at 1:11 PM, Egor Pasko <eg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On the 0x689 day of Apache Harmony Alexei Fedotov wrote:
>> [added dev@]
>>
>> Egor,
>> Thanks for asking for review. I miss code exercises. The code looks
>> ok. BTW, the review took me here [1] - thanks Google for the wonderful
>> instrument.
>>
>> As for your last question, TI appeared in java earlier than
>> java.lang.instrument. This means implementing the latter using the
>> former may make some sense.
>>
>> [1] http://www.google.com/codesearch/p?hl=ru#TasP9sO-cIM/trunk/vm/vmcore/src/jvmti/jvmti.cpp&q=load_agentlib&exact_package=http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/harmony/enhanced/drlvm/
>
> Thanks, Alexey!
>
> I am totally not an expert in TI, please, correct me.
>
> My concern was that in TI mode DRLVM runs slower. One reason to this
> is that Jitrino.OPT does not support TI. It sounds like a high price
> to pay for some innocent instrumentations. What can we do about this?
>
> --
> Egor Pasko
>
>



-- 
With best regards / с наилучшими пожеланиями,
Alexei Fedotov / Алексей Федотов,
http://www.telecom-express.ru/
http://harmony.apache.org/
http://www.expressaas.com/
http://openmeetings.googlecode.com/

Re: patch OK?

Posted by Egor Pasko <eg...@gmail.com>.
On the 0x689 day of Apache Harmony Alexei Fedotov wrote:
> [added dev@]
>
> Egor,
> Thanks for asking for review. I miss code exercises. The code looks
> ok. BTW, the review took me here [1] - thanks Google for the wonderful
> instrument.
>
> As for your last question, TI appeared in java earlier than
> java.lang.instrument. This means implementing the latter using the
> former may make some sense.
>
> [1] http://www.google.com/codesearch/p?hl=ru#TasP9sO-cIM/trunk/vm/vmcore/src/jvmti/jvmti.cpp&q=load_agentlib&exact_package=http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/harmony/enhanced/drlvm/

Thanks, Alexey!

I am totally not an expert in TI, please, correct me.

My concern was that in TI mode DRLVM runs slower. One reason to this
is that Jitrino.OPT does not support TI. It sounds like a high price
to pay for some innocent instrumentations. What can we do about this?

-- 
Egor Pasko