On 09/03/2013 02:10 PM, Daniel Fuchs wrote: > Hi Jaroslav, > > Have you considered replacing the ThreadExecutionSynchronizer with > a plain (and more reliable) CyclicBarrier or Phaser object? > > <http://docs.oracle.com/javase/7/docs/api/java/util/concurrent/CyclicBarrier.html> > > <http://docs.oracle.com/javase/7/docs/api/java/util/concurrent/Phaser.html>
Yes, I've played with the idea of using more advanced concurrency constructs. But I couldn't fit the CyclicBarrier to the usecase and when I used Phaser the solution complexity was considerably higher. It might be due to my lack of experience with the Phaser, specifically, but the plain old 'synchronized' yielded the best results for me :( -JB- > > best regards > > -- daniel > > On 9/3/13 1:15 PM, Jaroslav Bachorik wrote: >> Please, review the following patch of the intermittently failing test: >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jbachorik/6815130/webrev.01 >> >> Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-6815130 >> >> >> Sometimes the ThreadExecutionSynchronizer class failes to achieve the >> desired synchronization (due to possible data races when evaluating and >> setting the "waiting" variable) leading to test failures. >> >> The patch fixes the possibility of data race. Also the Locks class is >> tidied up a bit. >> >> Thanks, >> >> -JB- >> >
