On Fri, 12 Jan 2024 15:02:59 GMT, Chris Hegarty wrote:
>> Update LinkedTransferQueue add and put methods to not call overridable offer.
>
> Chris Hegarty has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
> commit since the last revision:
>
> timed offer
src/java.base/share/class
> Update LinkedTransferQueue add and put methods to not call overridable offer.
Chris Hegarty has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
commit since the last revision:
timed offer
-
Changes:
- all: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/17393/files
- new: https
On Fri, 12 Jan 2024 15:06:01 GMT, Chris Hegarty wrote:
>> Update LinkedTransferQueue add and put methods to not call overridable offer.
>
> Chris Hegarty has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
> commit since the last revision:
>
> timed offer
With my CSR hat on, JDK-8
On Fri, 12 Jan 2024 15:06:01 GMT, Chris Hegarty wrote:
>> Update LinkedTransferQueue add and put methods to not call overridable offer.
>
> Chris Hegarty has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
> commit since the last revision:
>
> timed offer
src/java.base/share/class
On Mon, 15 Jan 2024 07:31:13 GMT, Andrey Turbanov wrote:
>> Chris Hegarty has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> timed offer
>
> src/java.base/share/classes/java/util/concurrent/LinkedTransferQueue.java
> line 1162:
>
>> 1160:
On Mon, 15 Jan 2024 01:55:12 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
> With my CSR hat on, JDK-8301341 should never have made the changes it did
> without going through a CSR request. We have been bitten by this kind of
> problem many times. Unless a public method is specified to utilise another
> public met
On Mon, 15 Jan 2024 09:49:53 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
>> With my CSR hat on, JDK-8301341 should never have made the changes it did
>> without going through a CSR request. We have been bitten by this kind of
>> problem many times. Unless a public method is specified to utilise another
>> public
On Mon, 15 Jan 2024 09:49:53 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
> > With my CSR hat on, JDK-8301341 should never have made the changes it did
> > without going through a CSR request. We have been bitten by this kind of
> > problem many times. Unless a public method is specified to utilise another
> > pu
On Tue, 16 Jan 2024 18:47:43 GMT, Joe Darcy wrote:
> We can and have run retroactive CSRs in cases like this before; I recommend
> we do one now.
Yes although the issue will be mute once JDK-8323659 is integrated into jdk22.
-
PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/17393#iss