RFR (XS): 8165860: workgroup classes are missing volatile qualifiers for lock-free code

Mikael Gerdin mikael.gerdin at oracle.com
Tue Sep 20 08:44:24 UTC 2016



On 2016-09-20 10:43, Thomas Schatzl wrote:
> Hi Erik,
>
> On Tue, 2016-09-20 at 10:28 +0200, Erik Österlund wrote:
>> Hi Thomas,
>>
>> On 2016-09-19 17:00, Thomas Schatzl wrote:
>>> On Mon, 2016-09-19 at 15:50 +0200, Mikael Gerdin wrote:
>>>> On 2016-09-19 15:48, Erik Österlund wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> Mikael Gerdin noticed a compiler workaround could be done in a
>>>>> nicer-looking way.
>>>    so just assigning the volatile to the temp is not sufficient to
>>> make sure the compiler generates code to only read it once?
>> The problem was more that solaris studio (only) complained that I was
>> losing the volatile qualifier when I did it the straight forward way
>> (just assigning from the volatile).
>> I tried again, and it doesn't seem to complain any longer. I must
>> have done something slightly different the first time I tried this -
>> sorry about that.
>>
>> If you prefer just assign from the volatile, then here is a new
>> webrev with that variant. I agree that probably looks better.
>>
>> Full webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~eosterlund/8165860/webrev.02
>> /
>> Incremental webrev:
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~eosterlund/8165860/webrev.01_02/
>>
>
> Looks best =D.
+1

/Mikael
>
> I can sponsor it if you want.
>
> Thomas
>


More information about the hotspot-gc-dev mailing list