On Mon, 19 Dec 2022 12:27:08 GMT, Serguei Spitsyn <sspit...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> @dholmes-ora >> Thank you for looking at this fix and for the comments. >> I will on replying and resolving them. > > This update just follows the common pattern which was introduced about two > years ago. At the moment I do not remember the exact reason. This code needs > to wait for the counter to become zero and to use `ThreadBlockInVM` which can > reach a safepoint in the destructor. Can we lock with a safepoint check in > this case? Or we should get rid of the `ThreadBlockInVM` then? > I'll check if this can be fixed. This can be a separate RFE if the reason for it being a nosafepoint lock no longer holds. It would be cleaner to use a normal safepoint checking lock than to artificially make the thread safepoint-safe before using it. ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/11690
