[PATCH] continuation of JDK-6736490
sergei.tsypanov at yandex.ru
Thu Aug 20 09:39:27 UTC 2020
in June I sent a letter regarding clean-ups of unnecessary explicit initialization of volatile variables .
Original mail caused some discussion regarding whether clean-up is safe as of JMM.
It turned out that Aleksey Shipilev tried to find conter-example against removal of explicit initialization of volatile variables
in concurrency-interest  and didn't find any.
Also Doug Lea mentions in the same discussion 
> But your account is a more careful version of reasoning
we've done before to conclude that there is never any reason to explicitly
initialize fields to 0/0.0/false/null.
The original message of mine was then forwarded to security-dev list as affected code related to security-libs 
and Sean Mullan issued JDK-8251548 as sub-issue of JDK-6736490 which already includes similar clean-up done for
There is also a plenty of possible volatile clean-ups (I've included them into a separate patch here), so I have two questions:
1) Could anyone sponsor the changes related to JDK-8251548 (patch is attached to )?
2) Should we create one more sub-issue in JDK-6736490 to handle the rest of changes (attached to this mail) or handle them
module by module?
Patch is attached, tier1 and tier2 are ok
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 26564 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the core-libs-dev