On Mon, 7 Dec 2020 07:41:46 GMT, Chris Plummer <cjplum...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> That was something I pointed out in the pre-review, and it has been
>> addressed in `commonRef_pinAll/unpinAll`:
>>
>> `568 if (gdata->pinAllCount == 1) {`
>> `618 if (gdata->pinAllCount == 0) {`
>
>> Okay. I would not have handled it at that level, but would have had
> pinAll/unpinAll operate unconditionally, but the calls to those methods
> being conditional based on the suspendAllCount.
>>
>>David
>
> Well, that's assuming `pinAll()` will only ever be used by by `suspendAll()`.
> One could imaging a future use, such as if
> `VirtualMachine.disableCollection()` were ever to be added.
I was also thinking `pinAll()/unpinAll()` should stand on their own, and not
implicitly depend/rely on `suspendAllCount`. As @plummercj says, one could
imagine we want to use these functions in other contexts in the future.
-------------
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/1595
