Re: svn commit: r1703866 - in /tomcat/tc8.0.x/trunk: ./ java/org/apache/tomcat/websocket/WsFrameBase.java java/org/apache/tomcat/websocket/WsFrameClient.java java/org/apache/tomcat/websocket/WsSession

Hi Mark, I think these are false positives because the completion handler is only called after the IO operation completes. There is an implicit happens-before order here. I have fixed these false positives recently. That's why I didn't report them in BZ. Could you try the latest version of

Re: svn commit: r1703866 - in /tomcat/tc8.0.x/trunk: ./ java/org/apache/tomcat/websocket/WsFrameBase.java java/org/apache/tomcat/websocket/WsFrameClient.java java/org/apache/tomcat/websocket/WsSession

Are you using the 1.7-SNAPSHOT downloaded recently? It's frequently updated. If that's the case, then it's probably a real race and I have to take a closer look. Thanks, Yilong On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 7:43 AM, Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> wrote: > On 18/09/2015 15:27, Yilong Li wrot

Re: svn commit: r1703866 - in /tomcat/tc8.0.x/trunk: ./ java/org/apache/tomcat/websocket/WsFrameBase.java java/org/apache/tomcat/websocket/WsFrameClient.java java/org/apache/tomcat/websocket/WsSession

Yes, you are right. These are real. I didn't rerun the entire test suite after fixing the obvious false positives. Yilong On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 7:58 AM, Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> wrote: > On 18/09/2015 15:51, Yilong Li wrote: > > Are you using the 1.7-SNAPSHOT downloaded

Re: RV-Predict bugs

On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 6:29 PM, Caldarale, Charles R < chuck.caldar...@unisys.com> wrote: > > From: Yilong Li [mailto:yilong...@runtimeverification.com] > > Subject: Re: RV-Predict bugs > > > So you are saying that the author of JMM misunderstands his own work? > &

Re: RV-Predict bugs

On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 3:09 PM, Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> wrote: > On 15/09/2015 22:55, Yilong Li wrote: > > > Fine. Let's do your example: > > T2R4 (out of order read returns null) > > T1R1 (returns null) > > T1W2 (writes non-null value) > > T1R4

Re: RV-Predict bugs

Your argument seems to assume that reordering is the only code transformation that can be done by compiler or hardware. I don't agree that you call this transformation a red herring. It might not be practical but it's certainly valid. Does it violate the intra-thread semantics you mentioned in JLS

Re: RV-Predict bugs

On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 2:33 PM, Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> wrote: > On 15/09/2015 21:51, Yilong Li wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 1:09 PM, Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> wrote: > > > >> On 15/09/2015 20:42, Caldarale, Charles R wrote: > >>

Re: RV-Predict bugs

On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 10:58 AM, Caldarale, Charles R < chuck.caldar...@unisys.com> wrote: > > From: Yilong Li [mailto:yilong...@runtimeverification.com] > > Subject: Re: RV-Predict bugs > > > The following is a valid execution trace consists of 5

Re: RV-Predict bugs

On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 11:32 AM, Caldarale, Charles R < chuck.caldar...@unisys.com> wrote: > > From: Yilong Li [mailto:yilong...@runtimeverification.com] > > Subject: Re: RV-Predict bugs > > > Well, it is the problem (at least part of it) because JLS says > "In

Re: svn commit: r1703194 - /tomcat/trunk/java/org/apache/tomcat/websocket/WsWebSocketContainer.java

I am not sure declaring this field as volatile is the right way to fix it because the increment is still not atomic. If this counter doesn't have to be precise, I think it's OK to allow data races on this field. Otherwise, it should be declared as atomic. Yilong On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 6:43 AM,

Re: RV-Predict bugs

On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 7:19 AM, Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> wrote: > On 13/09/2015 21:59, Yilong Li wrote: > > Sorry about the vague explanation. But the actual reasons are not the > point > > here. > > No, that is exactly the point. When you claim that somethin

Re: RV-Predict bugs

On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 12:29 PM, Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> wrote: > On 15/09/2015 17:59, Yilong Li wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 7:19 AM, Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> wrote: > > >> Long experience has lead us to be sceptical of bugs reported by &

Re: RV-Predict bugs

On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 12:06 PM, Caldarale, Charles R < chuck.caldar...@unisys.com> wrote: > > From: Yilong Li [mailto:yilong...@runtimeverification.com] > > Subject: Re: RV-Predict bugs > > > > True, but as Mark previously pointed out, no one cares. All tha

Re: RV-Predict bugs

-thread semantics? On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 2:01 PM, Caldarale, Charles R < chuck.caldar...@unisys.com> wrote: > > From: Yilong Li [mailto:yilong...@runtimeverification.com] > > Subject: Re: RV-Predict bugs > > > Nope, I know what I am doing. Let's first see what the expert s

Re: RV-Predict bugs

On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 1:09 PM, Mark Thomas wrote: > On 15/09/2015 20:42, Caldarale, Charles R wrote: > >> From: Mark Thomas [mailto:ma...@apache.org] > >> Subject: Re: RV-Predict bugs > > > >> Putting it into my own words to check my understanding: > > > >> - The two reads in

Re: RV-Predict bugs

need to be subscribed to the dev list in order to post to it. > >> > >> On 13/09/2015 14:08, Yilong Li wrote: > >>> Hi Mark, > >>> > >>> On Sun, Sep 13, 2015 at 4:08 AM, Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org > >>> <mailto:ma...@apache.org>>