On Tue, 4 Apr 2023 12:57:38 GMT, Thomas Stuefe <stu...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> Thanks @tstuefe . I see at that level if the object doesn't match the top of >> the lock-stack then we take the slow path. But then I'm lost - AFAICS the >> slow path is `InterpreterRuntime::monitorexit` and that doesn't have any >> fast-locking code in it at all ??? > > I'm not sure what you mean. `InterpreterRuntime::monitorexit` will enter > `ObjectSynchronizer::exit` which handles the fast-locking case under `if > (LockingMode == 2)...`. Or am I misunderstanding you? > > (I really wish for named constants instead of `1` and `2` constants though...) Thanks @tstuefe .I misread something. > (I really wish for named constants instead of 1 and 2 constants though...) Yeah but then we are back at the "what do we call this" problem :) ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/10907#discussion_r1157813697
