On Mon, 14 Sep 2020 13:48:25 GMT, Daniel D. Daugherty <dcu...@openjdk.org> wrote:
> @rkennke - Thanks for the review. I believe @fisk is going to address > your comments. Actually, if I understand it correctly, OopStorage already gives us full barriers, so we should be covered, and we can simply revert JDK-8251451: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rkennke/8247281-shenandoah.patch (Is there a better way to propose amendments to a PR?!) I believe this probably also means that we don't need to scan object monitor lists during thread-scans, and let SATB (or whatever concurrent marking) take care of it. @fisk WDYT? ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/135
