Hi Pavel, Alan and Paul,
Thanks for reviewing. I accepted the suggestions from Pavel and Paul and
created webrev.02:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~plevart/jdk9-dev/URL.factory/webrev.02/
Is this good to go into jdk9-dev?
Regards, Peter
On 07/04/2014 04:54 PM, Paul Sandoz wrote:
On Jul 3, 2014, at 6:33 PM, Alan Bateman <alan.bate...@oracle.com> wrote:
On 03/07/2014 09:43, Peter Levart wrote:
Hi,
I noticed a data race in java.net.URL:
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8049220
I propose the following simple patch:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~plevart/jdk9-dev/URL.factory/webrev.01/
A good catch and the change looks good to me.
Yes, well spotted. May i suggest that the following comment is updated:
1109 factory = fac; // volatile write
to say something about ensuring safe publication of a constructed handle? since
it is often quite tricky to reason about why a volatile write is needed (to
stamp in, at least, a StoreStore barrier).
For JMM v9 we may not need to mark such a ref as volatile.
I assume it just wasn't noticed because it can only be set once and probably
rared used too.
Yeah, i wonder whether it would ever get optimized/inlined to the point at
which re-ordering could practically happen.
Paul.
