On 6/2/14 9:23 PM, Christian Thalinger wrote:
On Jun 2, 2014, at 6:29 AM, Vladimir Ivanov <vladimir.x.iva...@oracle.com>
wrote:
Tobias, I'll take care of it.
Are you also taking care of the backports?
Yes. I'll backport into 8u myself and for 7 I'll ask help from Sustaining.
Best regards,
Vladimir Ivanov
Best regards,
Vladimir Ivanov
On 6/2/14 10:04 AM, Tobias Hartmann wrote:
On 28.05.2014 12:48, Vladimir Ivanov wrote:
Looks good.
It should be safe to sync on MTF instance since it's not accessible
outside (MTF and MT.form() are package-private).
Best regards,
Vladimir Ivanov
Thank you, Vladimir.
Could someone please push the patch?
Thanks,
Tobias
On 5/28/14 1:49 PM, Tobias Hartmann wrote:
Hi,
thanks everyone for the feedback!
@Remi: I agree with Paul. This is not a problem because if the normal
read sees an outdated null value, a new LambdaForm is created and
setCachedLambdaForm(...) is executed. This will guarantee that the
non-null value is seen and used. The unnecessary creation of a new
LamdaForm is not a problem either.
@John: I added the code that you suggested to simulate CAS. Please find
the new webrev at:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~anoll/8005873/webrev.02/
Sorry for the delay, I was on vacation.
Thanks,
Tobias
On 19.05.2014 20:31, John Rose wrote:
On May 16, 2014, at 4:56 AM, Tobias Hartmann
<tobias.hartm...@oracle.com> wrote:
Is it sufficient then to use synchronized (lambdaForms) { ... } in
setCachedLambdaForm(..) and a normal read in cachedLambdaForm(..)?
Yes, that is how I see it. The fast path is a racy non-volatile read
of a safely-published structure.
(If safe publication via arrays were broken, java.lang.String would be
broken. But the JMM is carefully designed to support safe publication
of array elements, and through array elements.)
— John
