On 8/29/13 11:04 AM, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
On 8/29/13 7:58 PM, Mandy Chung wrote:
On 8/29/13 9:46 AM, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
Here is the new webrev implementing Jason's suggestion.
Compared to previous webrev only Handler.java & StreamHandler.java
have changed.
<http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dfuchs/webrev_6823527/webrev.01/>
Looks good. I also agree that making those fields to be volatile is a
good suggestion and only requires writer to acquire the lock.
A minor comment: The setter methods in Handler class are synchronized
at the method entry whereas StreamHandler.setPushLevel synchronizes
after checkPermission() is called. checkPermission doesn't need to be
synchronized. Either way is fine with me and it'd be good to do it
consistently.
Hi Mandy,
Are you suggesting I should put checkPermission() within
the synchronized block? It might be more consistent with
what the other setters do. Although as you state it does
not matter much.
Having a second thought - do the setters really need to be
synchronized? My guess is that StreamHandler.publish is synchronized
so as to ensure that the log messages are sequential and not interpersed
when multiple threads are publishing. The spec is unclear. Perhaps it
worths looking into this further?
One more minor note: MemoryHandler.pushLevel can also be made volatile.
L262: look like the log manager is not needed in the existing code.
Mandy
