Charles Oliver Nutter wrote:
> You need CAS because one form of the interrupt check clears it and
> another does not. So the get + check + set of interrupt status needs to
> be atomic, or another thread could jump in and change it during that
> process.
I believe Thread.interrupted() and Thread.isInterrupted() can both be
implemented without a lock or CAS.
Here are correct implementations:
private volatile boolean interruptPending;
public boolean isInterrupted() {
return interruptPending;
}
public static boolean interrupted() {
Thread current = currentThread();
if (!current.interruptPending) {
return false;
}
current.interruptPending = false;
return true;
}
Any interrupts that happen before we clear the flag are duplicates that we can
ignore and any that happen after are new ones that will be returned by a
subsequent call. The key insight is that the interruptPending flag can be set
by any thread, but it can only be cleared by the thread it applies to.
Regards,
Jeroen
_______________________________________________
mlvm-dev mailing list
mlvm-dev@openjdk.java.net
http://mail.openjdk.java.net/mailman/listinfo/mlvm-dev
