On Tue, 13 Aug 2024 08:02:04 GMT, Alan Bateman <al...@openjdk.org> wrote:
> > It has been a while since I knew this code reasonably well so perhaps I > > have just forgotten this difference between AQS and built-in monitors, but > > it seems that a Condition.await can return by throwing an exception without > > re-acquiring the associated synchronizer. Or is that handled at a > > higher-level? > > The semantics are the same as monitor wait/notify so Condition.await must > guarantee to hold the lock when it returns. If ConditionNode.block were to > throw something like StackOverflowError then there would be an issue (it's a > different park to the one changed in this PR but I think you do have a good > point). AFAICS `await` would call the acquire method that was changed here. I know we have issues with OOME and SOE, but these changes admit more general exception possibilities that would seem to undermine the required guarantee. But perhaps a different `acquire` is involved in the `await` case? ------------- PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/20548#issuecomment-2287218877
