incubator-kato-spec mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stuart Monteith <>
Subject Andrew Johnson's comments: part 4
Date Thu, 10 Dec 2009 14:48:09 GMT
Page 92
"The Heap can be viewed as an unordered collection of JavaObjects..."

We expect a reproducible order.


"Get the set of objects which are stored in this heap."

Should explain whether JavaObject, for classes might appear.

(Andrew means the java/lang/Class object instances of classes)

Page 95

Could this throw CorruptDataException?
e.g. some javacore dumps omit this for arraylocks.

public int getEntryCount()

Number of times a thread is now holding locks on this monitor.

Page 98

Need static defined here.


"Returns" + extras

(Not sure what Andrew means by this).

"..., see HEAP_ROOT_ static above" where?

(Andrew is referring to the constants that are not included in the PDF 
form of the JavaDoc).

Page 100


"Returns a JavaObject or a JavaClass"

Is there a more type safe way of doing this?


Not very type safe. Is there a better way?

JavaThread? as well if precise stack frame not known (or JNI Local)

(Andrew touches on a good point here - IBM's 1.4.2 JVM will return 
JavaThread here due to it having a conservative garbage collector)

Page 102

Table 6.43 Class Summary

more info please

(Andrew is asking for more information on the Dump class)


Need some dump control

(Andrew is suggesting we have more control over dump generation.)

Page 103
Table A.2.


Segments, CS Short
           DS Short

(Andrew is point out how we don't support x86/x86_64 segment registers 
extending that point, we don't support addressing
using them with ImagePointer either)

Page 106
Table A.5 zSereies 31 register names

FP registers

(Andrew is pointing out how we don't list floating point registers.)

Page 107
Table A.6 zSeries 64 Register Names

psw0  Long }  Easier that PSW is BigInteger
psw1  Long }

(Andrew also makes the same point for z/Series 31 register names.)


And that concludes Andrew Johnson's comments.

There are a number of changes that need to be made to the document 
I've not listed all of Andrews comments. The ones not listed are the 
ones I have applied
as a "matter of law", i.e. spelling errors and indisputable points of fact.

I'll follow up with my comments separately.

Thanks Andrew.



Stuart Monteith

View raw message