RFR(XS): 8147844: new method j.l.Runtime.onSpinWait()

[mark.reinhold at oracle.com]

2016/1/28 8:12 -0800, Gil Tene <gil at azul.com>:
> On Jan 27, 2016, at 9:41 PM, David Holmes <david.holmes at oracle.com> wrote:
>> On 27/01/2016 11:31 PM, Ivan Krylov wrote:
>>> Earlier there was a discussion on this mail alias about the spin loop
>>> hint proposal [1]. Based on the feedback from that discussion some
>>> changes were incorporated and the JEP has been filed [2]. There seems to
>>> be a consensus on the API side. The JEP is now in a draft state and I
>>> hope this JEP will get targeted for java 9 shortly.
>> 
>> The discussion in [1] continued in:
>> 
>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2015-December/037063.html
>> 
>> but ended abruptly. In particular Mark's query as to why this moved
>> from Thread to Runtime was seemingly left unanswered.
> 
> The thread continued, but it looks like due to cross-posting with
> concurrency-interest and people replying on the thread dropping the
> cores-libs-dev recipient somehow.

I was wondering what happened to that thread ...

>                                   See continuations of the thread
> here:
> http://cs.oswego.edu/pipermail/concurrency-interest/2015-December/thread.html#14576
> and here:
> http://cs.oswego.edu/pipermail/concurrency-interest/2015-December/thread.html#14580
> 
> Mark's question on why this was moved from Thread to Runtime is
> discussed in detail there. An easy summary in a single message body
> can be found here:
> http://cs.oswego.edu/pipermail/concurrency-interest/2015-December/014587.html
> .

So that we have a self-contained record for posterity in the OpenJDK
mail archive, can someone please summarize the reasoning to this list,
core-libs-dev?

I also suggested that this single method doesn't really need a JEP.
You can do it that way if you really want to, but it will take a bit
more time.

- Mark