On 10/18/18 6:12 PM, Mandy Chung wrote:
On 10/18/18 12:27 AM, David Holmes wrote:
Hi Dean,
On 18/10/2018 2:06 PM, dean.l...@oracle.com wrote:
You're right, I missed that. I think the right thing to do is call
current_thread_exiting while holding the Threads_lock.
Then we can get rid of the parallel atomic counters. So, here's one
more try:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dlong/8021335/webrev.7/
Okay that is the simple and obvious solution that doesn't require
split counts. So I have to ask Mandy if she recalls why this approach
wasn't taken 15 years ago when the exit counts were added as part of:
It has been so long. I think it's likely an oversight.
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-4530538 ?
Does taking the Threads_lock here cost too much and cause a thread
termination bottleneck?
If the contention on Threads_lock is not high (that seems to me), it
should be okay. I'm not close to the VM implementation (lot of
changes since then) and I don't have a definitive answer unless I
study the code closely. You and others have a better judgement on this.
AFAICT the change is okay.
Thanks Mandy. David, OK to push?
dl
Mandy
