RFR 8010293 <was> Re: Potential issue with CHM.toArray

[Paul Sandoz]

On Sep 2, 2013, at 3:24 PM, Paul Sandoz <Paul.Sandoz at oracle.com> wrote:

> 
> On Sep 2, 2013, at 1:18 PM, Doug Lea <dl at cs.oswego.edu> wrote:
> 
>> On 08/28/2013 09:13 AM, Peter Levart wrote:
>>> On 08/28/2013 12:10 PM, Paul Sandoz wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>> 
>>>> Intermittent failures were reported with the CHM toArray test in the JDK.
>>>> 
>>>> I updated the tests to increase the number of runs and the number of workers
>>>> and i can reliably reproduce on my laptop, see below.
>>>> 
>>>> The test presumes the size should always increase but fails when it observes a
>>>> new new size less than the previously observed size.
>>>> 
>>>> Is that a valid assumption?
>>> 
>>> I guess it should be a valid assumption.
>> 
>> Thanks to Peter for a good suggestion for preserving this
>> assumption without needing to block (or messily avoid blocking)
>> on traversal, and to Paul for helping to re-test. An update is
>> now in our CVS and in lambda, so can also now move to tl.
>> 
> 
> Here is the fix in the lambda repo which can be applied to tl:
> 
>  http://hg.openjdk.java.net/lambda/lambda/jdk/rev/b73937e96ae0
>  http://hg.openjdk.java.net/lambda/lambda/jdk/raw-rev/b73937e96ae0
> 

Anyone up for reviewing this?

Thanks,
Paul.