RFR 7132378: Race in FutureTask if used with explicit set ( not Runnable )

[David Holmes]

Hi Chris,

Hard to evaluate a completely new design like this as the devil is 
always in the details.

I don't understand the purpose of handlePossibleCancellationInterrupt. 
Given it doesn't clear the interrupt state why does it need to wait?

Otherwise it looks okay.

Thanks,
David

On 24/01/2012 1:26 AM, Chris Hegarty wrote:
> This issue was raised on the jdk7u-dev mailing list [1].
>
> The change is to update the FutureTask implementation to what is in
> Doug's CVS. The old implementation using AbstractQueuedSynchronizer is
> replaced with a control "state" field that is updated by CAS to track
> completion, along with a Treiber stack to hold waiting threads.
>
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~chegar/7132378/webrev.00/webrev/
>
> I have already reviewed this change. The diffs in the webrev are not all
> that useful, I reviewed it by going through the new file.
>
> Doug,
> I added a new test for this. It fails about 1 in every 3-4 runs on some
> of the boxes I have access to. Is this useful? Would you want to take it
> into your CVS?
>
> -Chris.
>
> [1]
> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk7u-dev/2012-January/001439.html