RFR: JDK-8149925 We don't need jdk.internal.ref.Cleaner any more

[Peter Levart]

On 04/01/2016 06:08 PM, Peter Levart wrote:
>
>
> On 04/01/2016 05:18 PM, Peter Levart wrote:
>> @Roger:
>>
>> ...
>>
>> About entanglement between nio Bits and 
>> ExtendedCleaner.retryWhileHelpingClean(). It is the same level of 
>> entanglement as between the DirectByteBuffer constructor and 
>> Cleaner.register(). In both occasions an action is provided to the 
>> Cleaner. Cleaner.register() takes a cleanup action and 
>> ExtendedCleaner.retryWhileHelpingClean() takes a retriable 
>> "allocating" or "reservation" action. "allocation" or "reservation" 
>> is the opposite of cleanup. Both methods are encapsulated in the same 
>> object because those two functions must be coordinated. So I think 
>> that collocating them together makes sense. What do you think?
>
> ...to illustrate what I mean, here's a variant that totally untangles 
> Bits from Cleaner and moves the whole Cleaner interaction into the 
> DirectByteBuffer itself:
>
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~plevart/jdk9-dev/removeInternalCleaner/webrev.13.part2/ 
>
>
> Notice the symmetry between Cleaner.retryWhileHelpingClean : 
> Cleaner.register and Allocator : Deallocator ?
>
>
> Regards, Peter
>

And here's also a diff between webrev.12.part2 and webrev.13.part2:

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~plevart/jdk9-dev/removeInternalCleaner/webrev.diff.12to13.part2/

Regards, Peter