> On Jun 17, 2016, at 7:45 PM, Sean Mullan <sean.mul...@oracle.com> wrote: > > On 06/16/2016 10:50 PM, Wang Weijun wrote: >> >>> On Jun 17, 2016, at 10:31 AM, Xuelei Fan <xuelei....@oracle.com> wrote: >>> >>> What did you mean "can a long field be a safe volatile?" >> >> A long value cannot be updated atomically, and I am afraid that another >> thread might only see half bits updated and the other half not. > > Have you considered using java.util.concurrent.atomic.AtomicLong?
I don't think it's worth using an AtomicLong. Wherever reseedCounter is accessed, it is already inside a synchronized block. The only reason I choose a volatile integer is that I can use it with the double checked locking technique. --Max > > --Sean
