<AWT Dev> OpenJdk11-28-EA JDialog hanging

Martin Balao mbalao at redhat.com
Wed Oct 31 19:42:33 UTC 2018

Even though I'm still not convinced about the need of imposing partial
order sync on asynchronous events, we can do it.

Here it's Webrev.03 that includes partial ordering of non-SequencedEvent
events and Sergey's unit test:

 * http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mbalao/webrevs/8204142/8204142.webrev.03/
 * http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mbalao/webrevs/8204142/8204142.webrev.03.zip

I've put Sergey's unit test into a bash-loop and reached 300+ iterations
without any issues. Laurent's functional test is also passing. Laurent's
unit test (not included here) does not pass for the reasons already

Kind regards,

On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 1:13 PM, Sergey Bylokhov <Sergey.Bylokhov at oracle.com
> wrote:

> Hi, Martin.
> On 31/10/2018 09:03, Martin Balao wrote:
>> Your MultipleContextsUnitTest test has 2 assertions that don't look good
>> to me:
>>   * dispatchSENumber < num1
>>   * dispatchSENumber < num2
>> My understanding is that these assertions mean that a non-SequencedEvent
>> event is expected to be synchronized with SequencedEvent events. If such
>> synchronization is needed, the event has to be wrapped in a SequencedEvent
>> event. There are no guarantees otherwise; previous to my proposal these
>> event were discarded and in my Webrev.02 they are dispatched asynchronously.
> This is not a strong synchronization, it is just an expectation that the
> events which were posted after SequencedEvent should be dispatched after
> it. So if the app will have focus event and then mouse click, then mouse
> click should be dispatched after the focus. Note that the for this case the
> test does not check the exact sequence of order(==), just a relative
> order(<).
> --
> Best regards, Sergey.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/awt-dev/attachments/20181031/03df3f90/attachment.html>

More information about the awt-dev mailing list