On 18/02/2014 11:03 PM, Staffan Larsen wrote:
On 18 feb 2014, at 13:09, David Holmes <david.hol...@oracle.com> wrote:
Hi Staffan,
If you get a spurious wakeup from wait():
151 try {
152 synchronized (bkptSignal) {
153 bkptSignal.wait(5000);
154 }
155 } catch (InterruptedException ee) {
156 }
157 if (prevBkptCount == bkptCount) {
158 failure("failure: test hung");
you could report failure. But that is far less likely than the current problem
using sleep.
Right. Adding “continue;” inside the catch(InterruptedException) block should
guard against that.
No, a spurious wakeup is not an interrupt - the wait() will simply return.
David
/Staffan
David
On 18/02/2014 8:19 PM, Staffan Larsen wrote:
Still looking for Reviewer for this change.
Thanks,
/Staffan
On 11 feb 2014, at 15:12, Staffan Larsen <staffan.lar...@oracle.com> wrote:
Updated the test to use proper synchronization and notification between
threads. Should be more stable and much faster.
bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-6952105
webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sla/6952105/webrev.00/
Thanks,
/Staffan
