RFR [8038333] java/lang/ref/EarlyTimeout.java failed

Ivan Gerasimov ivan.gerasimov at oracle.com
Sun Mar 30 09:04:12 UTC 2014

Thank you Mandy for review!

On 30.03.2014 8:20, Mandy Chung wrote:
> On 3/27/2014 6:36 AM, Ivan Gerasimov wrote:
>> Now, I updated the webrev with the additional delay as you suggested:
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~igerasim/8038333/2/webrev/
> Thanks for the updated patch, Ivan and also Peter for the suggestion 
> to delay to give a chance for the threads to wait on the lock.
> Ivan - I agree with you that there is no guarantee that one thread can 
> remove the reference before the timeout.   With this patch, basically 
> the test can only verify that the remove(timeout) must be >= timeout 
> if no reference is in the queue.   That makes the test less 
> interesting but it's a tradeoff with test stability.   I wonder if 
> running this test in othervm would help increase the chance of 
> enqueuing the reference after System.gc.
> I think it's okay with your proposed patcht.  We should revisit this 
> test in the future to see how we can improve the test for example 
> something similar to what Peter suggests.  Can you file a bug for the 
> test improvement so that we can look into that in the future?
Okey. Will do.

> BTW there is a typo in line 40 s/System.gs()/System.gc()/.  It'd be 
> good to add a comment in line 66 to make it clear that the main thread 
> waits until the threads has started and give it a chance for the 
> threads to block on the queue.remove(timeout) call.
Yes, I will update the comment as you suggest before pushing.

Sincerely yours,

More information about the core-libs-dev mailing list