+1
-phil.
On 05/18/2016 09:49 AM, Sergey Bylokhov wrote:
On 17.05.16 19:15, Phil Race wrote:
The reason for the change to tracks.toArray() was not obvious
from the code and I understood it only after reading your comment
below. So perhaps you could add a short comment before you push.
The comment is added:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~serb/8156169/webrev.02/
-phil.
On 05/17/2016 07:30 AM, Sergey Bylokhov wrote:
Hello, Audio Guru.
Please review the fix for jdk9.
While working on some bugs reported by the mach5 project, I found that
some of our tests are quite unstable, and the reason was in this(or
similar) pattern:
....
clip.start();
while(clip.isRunning());
....
The status of the clip is run or not is updated on a different thread,
but our clip implementation lacks of synchronization of getters and
the hotspot inline such methods to while(true). There are some other
flags which have the similar issue, I tried to fix all of them in the
proposed version of the fix.
Also I propose the small cleanup of Sequence.java
- It is not necessary to sync tracks.removeElement() on tracks,
because this is synchronized method.
- tracks.toArray(new Track[tracks.size()]) should be synchronized on
tracks, because the problem can occurs between tracks.size() and
tracks.toArray(). But I decided to pass the empty array, so all the
work will be done in toArray() which is synchronized method.
Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8156169
Webrev can be found at:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~serb/8156169/webrev.01
