[concurrency-interest] AtomicReference.updateAndGet() mandatory updating

Alex Otenko oleksandr.otenko at gmail.com
Tue May 30 09:52:14 EDT 2017

But then a successful CAS does not guarantee it synchronizes-with the store that makes it succeed - in case it was not a volatile store.

So if we leave out the non-volatile stores to the same variable that may be interacting with CAS, for a moment…


> On 30 May 2017, at 14:24, Andrew Haley <aph at redhat.com> wrote:
> On 30/05/17 10:12, Alex Otenko wrote:
>> So my big question is: can a strong CAS detect the presence of an
>> interleaving store without synchronizing-with it?
> Surely yes: what if the interleaving store is not a volatile store?
> I may be misunderstanding the question.
> -- 
> Andrew Haley
> Java Platform Lead Engineer
> Red Hat UK Ltd. <https://www.redhat.com>
> EAC8 43EB D3EF DB98 CC77 2FAD A5CD 6035 332F A671

More information about the Concurrency-interest mailing list