Re: RFR: 8172048: Re-examine use of AtomicReference in java.security.Policy

2017-01-02 Thread David Holmes
On 2/01/2017 9:45 PM, Claes Redestad wrote: On 12/31/2016 12:45 AM, David Holmes wrote: I'll let you think about it so more. I'll be back in the office on Tuesday :) After giving it some thought I think it's better to just document the need for some hygiene in the field declaration: http://cr

Re: RFR: 8172048: Re-examine use of AtomicReference in java.security.Policy

2017-01-02 Thread Claes Redestad
On 2017-01-02 18:02, Chris Hegarty wrote: On 2 Jan 2017, at 11:45, Claes Redestad wrote: On 12/31/2016 12:45 AM, David Holmes wrote: I'll let you think about it so more. I'll be back in the office on Tuesday :) After giving it some thought I think it's better to just document the need fo

Re: RFR: 8172048: Re-examine use of AtomicReference in java.security.Policy

2017-01-02 Thread Chris Hegarty
> On 2 Jan 2017, at 11:45, Claes Redestad wrote: > > On 12/31/2016 12:45 AM, David Holmes wrote: >> I'll let you think about it so more. I'll be back in the office on Tuesday :) > > After giving it some thought I think it's better to just document the need > for some hygiene in the field declar

Re: RFR: 8172048: Re-examine use of AtomicReference in java.security.Policy

2017-01-02 Thread Claes Redestad
On 12/31/2016 12:45 AM, David Holmes wrote: I'll let you think about it so more. I'll be back in the office on Tuesday :) After giving it some thought I think it's better to just document the need for some hygiene in the field declaration: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~redestad/8172048/webrev.02

Re: RFR: 8172048: Re-examine use of AtomicReference in java.security.Policy

2016-12-30 Thread David Holmes
On 31/12/2016 12:50 AM, Claes Redestad wrote: Hi David, On 2016-12-30 02:10, David Holmes wrote: Hi Claes, On 28/12/2016 12:04 AM, Claes Redestad wrote: Hi, since java.util.concurrent.AtomicReference was changed to use a VarHandle internally, using it from within the security libraries can l

Re: RFR: 8172048: Re-examine use of AtomicReference in java.security.Policy

2016-12-30 Thread Claes Redestad
Hi David, On 2016-12-30 02:10, David Holmes wrote: Hi Claes, On 28/12/2016 12:04 AM, Claes Redestad wrote: Hi, since java.util.concurrent.AtomicReference was changed to use a VarHandle internally, using it from within the security libraries can lead to hard to diagnose bootstrap cycles (since

Re: RFR: 8172048: Re-examine use of AtomicReference in java.security.Policy

2016-12-29 Thread David Holmes
Hi Claes, On 28/12/2016 12:04 AM, Claes Redestad wrote: Hi, since java.util.concurrent.AtomicReference was changed to use a VarHandle internally, using it from within the security libraries can lead to hard to diagnose bootstrap cycles (since VarHandles has to do doPrivileged calls during setup

Re: RFR: 8172048: Re-examine use of AtomicReference in java.security.Policy

2016-12-27 Thread Peter Levart
Hi Claes, A nice find! This is certainly a straightforward and low-risk fix for breaking the initialization cycle problem with JDK-8062389. Related to VarHandles, the call trace of the initialization cycle also includes the following part of code in VarHandle: AccessMode(final Stri