On Mon, 24 Nov 2025 17:34:21 GMT, Viktor Klang <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Adds the patch by @DougLea
>
> test/jdk/java/util/concurrent/BlockingQueue/MissedPoll.java line 46:
>
>> 44: try (var pool = Executors.newCachedThreadPool()) {
>> 45: var futures = new ArrayList<Future<Integer>>();
>> 46: var phaser = new Phaser(4);
>
> @DougLea Would it make sense to do the following, and then only keep a single
> `phaser.arriveAndAwaitAdvance();` ? (and skip the explicit q.clear())
>
> Suggestion:
>
> var phaser = new Phaser(4) {
> @Override
> protected boolean onAdvance(int phase, int registeredParties)
> {
> q.clear();
> return super.onAdvance(phase, registeredParties);
> }
> };
Sure. I was just trying to minimally adapt the submitter's bug report as test,
so left this as-is.
> test/jdk/java/util/concurrent/BlockingQueue/MissedPoll.java line 68:
>
>> 66: if (future.get() != 0)
>> 67: throw new Error();
>> 68: }
>
> @DougLea It might make sense to assert/verify that the queue is empty at the
> end of the test?
OK, except that it would need further adjustment to force test to fail rather
than getting stuck.
-------------
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/28479#discussion_r2559764751
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/28479#discussion_r2559772952
