On Fri, 2 May 2025 15:17:25 GMT, Chen Liang <li...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> The recent patch #23866 makes calling `ClassValue::remove()` from >> `ClassValue::computeValue()` end up in infinite loops while fixing the stale >> value risk from the method. >> >> The proposed fix is to preserve the stale value risk fix, and update the >> remove-from-compute behavior from the original designated no-op behavior to >> throwing an exception, as the original behavior conflicts with the stale >> value fix. >> >> The implementation track the owner thread in promises (accessed in locked >> section); as a result, we can fail-fast on recursive removals from >> `computeValue`. I did not choose to use `ThreadTracker` as it is designed >> for single tracker and multiple threads, while this case here sees often >> just one thread, and the threads outlive the promise objects. >> >> Also updated the API specs for `remove` to more concisely describe the >> memory effects. Please review the associated CSR as well. > > Chen Liang has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional > commit since the last revision: > > Update src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/ClassValue.java > > Co-authored-by: Shaojin Wen <shaojin.we...@alibaba-inc.com> src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/ClassValue.java line 222: > 220: } > 221: > 222: RemovalToken permission = (RemovalToken) accessed; // nullable This might be better if renamed to `removalToken` or just `token` instead of `permission`, in order to have a consistent terminology. ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/24043#discussion_r2080064021
