On Tue, 20 Dec 2022 11:30:24 GMT, Dawid Weiss <d...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> I'm on the fence a little on this point. I really dislike the potential for >> a busy loop, but also don't want the added complication of retry/backoff in >> this loop. But really the latter is the right solution. lemme see how it >> looks. > > Don't get me wrong - you folks are much deeper into low-level details than I > am so perhaps it isn't possible that the OS or the hardware ever returns 0 > here. From the public API contract perspective there's nothing preventing it > from happening though. It's a bit strange for me to see the internal > implementation accepts a stricter requirement. I added a trivial retry mechanism see https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/11722/commits/c1355274911537fd25eae873908b84617bbb2e58 ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/11722
