On Tue, 26 Sep 2023 20:20:29 GMT, Chris Plummer <cjplum...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> I managed to get it to fail 4/100 times in our CI so armed with that I will >> try swapping the order. Though I have to admit I tend to agree with Chris >> that the code in question seems unlikely to be executed such that this >> failure mode is so repeatable. > > I'm not seeing that this code has much impact on the failure rate. I've tried > changing the order and also have tried adding a nanosleep(). Always fails at > about the same rate. Switching the order did not fix the problem. Even if we end up resolving that this is just something that can happen when SA inspects things, I'd prefer to understand how this can arise. I guess I need to look into how the SA tries to find the owner. ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15907#discussion_r1337758338
