On Sep 2, 2013, at 3:24 PM, Paul Sandoz <paul.san...@oracle.com> wrote:
> > On Sep 2, 2013, at 1:18 PM, Doug Lea <d...@cs.oswego.edu> wrote: > >> On 08/28/2013 09:13 AM, Peter Levart wrote: >>> On 08/28/2013 12:10 PM, Paul Sandoz wrote: >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> Intermittent failures were reported with the CHM toArray test in the JDK. >>>> >>>> I updated the tests to increase the number of runs and the number of >>>> workers >>>> and i can reliably reproduce on my laptop, see below. >>>> >>>> The test presumes the size should always increase but fails when it >>>> observes a >>>> new new size less than the previously observed size. >>>> >>>> Is that a valid assumption? >>> >>> I guess it should be a valid assumption. >> >> Thanks to Peter for a good suggestion for preserving this >> assumption without needing to block (or messily avoid blocking) >> on traversal, and to Paul for helping to re-test. An update is >> now in our CVS and in lambda, so can also now move to tl. >> > > Here is the fix in the lambda repo which can be applied to tl: > > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/lambda/lambda/jdk/rev/b73937e96ae0 > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/lambda/lambda/jdk/raw-rev/b73937e96ae0 > Anyone up for reviewing this? Thanks, Paul.
