On Thu, 13 Mar 2025 13:34:51 GMT, Dmitry Chuyko wrote:
> Please review a tiny fix in the ForkJoinPool. Since JDK 9 (JDK-8134852 [1])
> in one case when TC subfield in ctl field is decremented, the applied masking
> (UMASK, upper bits) may not preserve neighbor RC subfield sometimes. In JDKs
>
On Tue, 18 Mar 2025 09:11:00 GMT, Dmitry Chuyko wrote:
>> Please review a tiny fix in the ForkJoinPool. Since JDK 9 (JDK-8134852 [1])
>> in one case when TC subfield in ctl field is decremented, the applied
>> masking (UMASK, upper bits) may not preserve neighbor RC subfield sometimes.
>> In J
On Tue, 18 Mar 2025 09:11:00 GMT, Dmitry Chuyko wrote:
>> Please review a tiny fix in the ForkJoinPool. Since JDK 9 (JDK-8134852 [1])
>> in one case when TC subfield in ctl field is decremented, the applied
>> masking (UMASK, upper bits) may not preserve neighbor RC subfield sometimes.
>> In J
On Tue, 18 Mar 2025 09:11:00 GMT, Dmitry Chuyko wrote:
>> Please review a tiny fix in the ForkJoinPool. Since JDK 9 (JDK-8134852 [1])
>> in one case when TC subfield in ctl field is decremented, the applied
>> masking (UMASK, upper bits) may not preserve neighbor RC subfield sometimes.
>> In J
> Please review a tiny fix in the ForkJoinPool. Since JDK 9 (JDK-8134852 [1])
> in one case when TC subfield in ctl field is decremented, the applied masking
> (UMASK, upper bits) may not preserve neighbor RC subfield sometimes. In JDKs
> prior to 19 FJP may stop executing tasks, which requires
On Thu, 13 Mar 2025 13:34:51 GMT, Dmitry Chuyko wrote:
> Please review a tiny fix in the ForkJoinPool. Since JDK 9 (JDK-8134852 [1])
> in one case when TC subfield in ctl field is decremented, the applied masking
> (UMASK, upper bits) may not preserve neighbor RC subfield sometimes. In JDKs
>
On Thu, 13 Mar 2025 13:34:51 GMT, Dmitry Chuyko wrote:
> Please review a tiny fix in the ForkJoinPool. Since JDK 9 (JDK-8134852 [1])
> in one case when TC subfield in ctl field is decremented, the applied masking
> (UMASK, upper bits) may not preserve neighbor RC subfield sometimes. In JDKs
>
On Thu, 13 Mar 2025 13:34:51 GMT, Dmitry Chuyko wrote:
> Please review a tiny fix in the ForkJoinPool. Since JDK 9 (JDK-8134852 [1])
> in one case when TC subfield in ctl field is decremented, the applied masking
> (UMASK, upper bits) may not preserve neighbor RC subfield sometimes. In JDKs
>
On Thu, 13 Mar 2025 13:34:51 GMT, Dmitry Chuyko wrote:
> Please review a tiny fix in the ForkJoinPool. Since JDK 9 (JDK-8134852 [1])
> in one case when TC subfield in ctl field is decremented, the applied masking
> (UMASK, upper bits) may not preserve neighbor RC subfield sometimes. In JDKs
>
On Mon, 17 Mar 2025 14:43:05 GMT, Chen Liang wrote:
> It seems this is an overflow for the TC part of the flag. The RC part seems
> to be able to overflow too, but because it occupies the higher bits its
> overflow will never affect the TC. And this is the only site where TC is
> masked with `
On Thu, 13 Mar 2025 13:34:51 GMT, Dmitry Chuyko wrote:
> Please review a tiny fix in the ForkJoinPool. Since JDK 9 (JDK-8134852 [1])
> in one case when TC subfield in ctl field is decremented, the applied masking
> (UMASK, upper bits) may not preserve neighbor RC subfield sometimes. In JDKs
>
On Thu, 13 Mar 2025 13:34:51 GMT, Dmitry Chuyko wrote:
> Please review a tiny fix in the ForkJoinPool. Since JDK 9 (JDK-8134852 [1])
> in one case when TC subfield in ctl field is decremented, the applied masking
> (UMASK, upper bits) may not preserve neighbor RC subfield sometimes. In JDKs
>
On Thu, 13 Mar 2025 13:34:51 GMT, Dmitry Chuyko wrote:
> Please review a tiny fix in the ForkJoinPool. Since JDK 9 (JDK-8134852 [1])
> in one case when TC subfield in ctl field is decremented, the applied masking
> (UMASK, upper bits) may not preserve neighbor RC subfield sometimes. In JDKs
>
13 matches
Mail list logo
