Aleksey,
If multiple threads have to synchronize access to the buffer then the
reads/writes do not need to be atomic. Atomicity is only needed when
data races are allowed.
David
On 20/12/2012 3:48 AM, Aleksey Shipilev wrote:
Hi guys,
I wanted to cross-check what's the expected behavior of Buffers with
respect to atomicity? Don't confuse the atomic operations (a la
j.u.c.atomic.*) and the read/write atomicity. Here's the concrete
example, should the assert always be true?
ByteBuffer buf = ByteBuffer.allocate(100);
(publish $buf to both threads properly)
(start both threads)
Thread 1:
buf.putInt(0, 42); // at position 0
Thread 2:
int i = buf.getInt(0); // at position 0
Assert.assertTrue( (i == 0) || (i == 42) )
Javadoc is silent about that, except for noting Buffers are not supposed
to be used from the multiple threads without synchronization. I would
anyway advocate to follow the atomicity behavior of plain fields and
arrays, and make these reads/writes atomic under the race.
The apparent reason for at least BB to fail to be atomic is that we
read/write larger values byte-by-byte. Luckily, it appears to be easy to
fix (for a given endianness, we can just throw in the Unsafe call).
Before going out and submitting the RFE, I wanted to crosscheck if
somebody has strong feelings about this.
Thanks,
Aleksey.
