On Mon, 24 May 2021 02:29:23 GMT, David Holmes <dhol...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> Okay I will file a RFE to get the memory ordering semantics of >> set_thread_state cleaned up so we don't have any missing barriers where >> needed, nor redundant barriers. >> >> Note that the expectation is that we write the code for the loosest possible >> memory model with all barriers expressed in the code, and it is then up to >> the implementation of those barriers to reduce it to nothing if not needed >> on a given platform. >> >> Thanks, >> David > > I have filed JDK-8267585, but I realize now what you are saying. The existing > code handles the barrier inconsistently. In most places it is only inside > set_thread_state, for those platforms that need it. Elsewhere it is explicit > in the code that calls set_thread_state - which leads to redundant barriers > on the platforms that need them. I mistakenly flagged the implicit cases as a > bug based on the existence of the explicit cases - but that is not the case. > Sorry for the confusion. > > The additional storestore barriers you added before the call to > set_thread_state can be removed, and I will tidy this up using the new RFE. > > Thanks, > David Sounds good, thank. ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/3875
