kezhuw commented on a change in pull request #15273:
URL: https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/15273#discussion_r600455252
##########
File path:
flink-core/src/main/java/org/apache/flink/core/memory/MemorySegment.java
##########
@@ -217,10 +222,14 @@ public int size() {
/**
* Checks whether the memory segment was freed.
*
+ * <p>This method internally involves cross-thread synchronization. Do not
use for performance
+ * sensitive code paths.
+ *
* @return <tt>true</tt>, if the memory segment has been freed,
<tt>false</tt> otherwise.
*/
public boolean isFreed() {
- return address > addressLimit;
+ // in performance sensitive cases, use 'address > addressLimit' instead
+ return isFreedAtomic.get();
Review comment:
I guess so. I believed that `1` covers `2` and `1` will hunt more cases.
What I am afraid of is: we will rollback to old situation after all existing
cases hunted and `1` ruled out.
I guess we could also reconsider this if unsafe part is used as "unmanaged"
in future. I hope they are always "managed".
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]
