Probably SyncCounter was introduced before CountdownLatch was available in jdk. I think it should be good to switch to countdown latch.
On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 9:28 AM Venkateswara Rao Jujjuri <[email protected]> wrote: > I am mostly concerned about this logic in block() which makes us > susceptible to spurious wake-ups. > > if (i == prev) { > break; > } > > Anyone comments? > > On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 5:23 PM, Venkateswara Rao Jujjuri < > [email protected] > > wrote: > > > LedgerHandle sync interface heavily depends on SyncCounter to convert > > async interfaces > > into sync interfaces. > > > > Usaylly > > > > SyncCounter.inc() > > asyncCall() > > SyncCOunter.block(0) > > > > The block code is. > > > > synchronized void block(int limit) throws InterruptedException { > > while (i > limit) { > > int prev = i; > > wait(); > > if (i == prev) { > > break; > > } > > } > > } > > > > Since 'i' is going to be same as 'prev' on spurious wakeup, and wait() > can > > return > > on spurious wakeups, aren't we susceptible? or I am missing something > here? > > > > How about replacing SyncCounter with CountDownLatch. > > If we agree, I can raise a ticket. > > > > -- > > Jvrao > > --- > > First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then > > you win. - Mahatma Gandhi > > > > > > > > > -- > Jvrao > --- > First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then > you win. - Mahatma Gandhi >
