[concurrency-interest] a volatile bug?

√iktor Ҡlang viktor.klang at gmail.com
Sat May 19 09:16:28 EDT 2012

Wait, what, there's no JMM tests? I mean even if these things are
statistical tests at best, they'd at least provide some guard rails.


On Sat, May 19, 2012 at 3:09 PM, Doug Lea <dl at cs.oswego.edu> wrote:

> On 05/16/12 18:01, Boehm, Hans wrote:
>> Would it make sense to expand a test suite with a bunch of memory model
>> tests, e.g.:
>> no CSE across volatile load
>> corresponding test for a volatile store:
>>        r1 = x; v = ...; r2 = x;  use r1   doesn't replace the use of r1
>> with r2
>> Dekker's example
>> No fusion of potentially infinite loops
>> Maybe IRIW/write atomicity
> Back during JDK5 development (for JSR 133 and 166), we did create
> some such tests (some of which are available in our test/loops CVS)
> but they were never collected or systematized into a  hotspot
> JMM test suite. I'm not sure whether there was a test (or an
> implicit one in any of our jsr166 tests) that hit this particular
> case, but my guess is that this C1 (-client) bug arose after
> our initial JDK5 testing. (Nearly all "routine" j.u.c tests use
> C2 (-server).)  Hopefully this bug will spur more complete regression
> testing.
> -Doug
> ______________________________**_________________
> Concurrency-interest mailing list
> Concurrency-interest at cs.**oswego.edu <Concurrency-interest at cs.oswego.edu>
> http://cs.oswego.edu/mailman/**listinfo/concurrency-interest<http://cs.oswego.edu/mailman/listinfo/concurrency-interest>

Viktor Klang

Akka Tech Lead
Typesafe <http://www.typesafe.com/> - The software stack for applications
that scale

Twitter: @viktorklang
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://cs.oswego.edu/pipermail/concurrency-interest/attachments/20120519/00df30bb/attachment.html>

More information about the Concurrency-interest mailing list