[concurrency-interest] On park and unpark

David Holmes davidcholmes at aapt.net.au
Sat Aug 26 18:56:57 EDT 2017


Hi Andrew,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Concurrency-interest [mailto:concurrency-interest-bounces at cs.oswego.edu] On Behalf Of Andrew Haley
> Sent: Saturday, August 26, 2017 7:03 PM
> To: concurrency-interest at cs.oswego.edu
> Subject: Re: [concurrency-interest] On park and unpark
> 
> On 25/08/17 23:29, David Holmes wrote:
> 
> > We've been trying to consolidate and share as much common code as
> > possible on "posix" supporting platforms and recently refactored
> > things to share the PlatformEvent and Parker code (8174231). So to me
> > there would have to be a big win in using futex directly to justify
> > using a custom implementation.
> 
> That seems rather surprising to me: HotSpot has always allowed (nay, even encouraged) back ends to use custom code for
> performance reasons, and has never insisted that there must be a "big win".  At least as long as I can remember.  If there's been a
> change of policy in this area it should be up for discussion.

To me "performance reasons" == "big win". You don't introduce specialized, harder to maintain, platform specific code, unless there is a good reason to. I don't think there has been any "change in policy" here - not that there has really been a "policy" as such.

David
 
> --
> Andrew Haley
> Java Platform Lead Engineer
> Red Hat UK Ltd. <https://www.redhat.com>
> EAC8 43EB D3EF DB98 CC77 2FAD A5CD 6035 332F A671 _______________________________________________
> Concurrency-interest mailing list
> Concurrency-interest at cs.oswego.edu
> http://cs.oswego.edu/mailman/listinfo/concurrency-interest



More information about the Concurrency-interest mailing list