[crac] RFR: Introduce per-Priority Context with different policies [v5]

[Radim Vansa]

On Wed, 31 May 2023 08:57:08 GMT, Anton Kozlov <akozlov at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> A follow-up work for #60:
>> 
>> * Each priority now has a dedicated context, so contextes may provide different policies.
>> * the Global Context reverted from BlockingOrderedContext to OrderedContext, as that may have a huge impact on users. Probably we'll want to expose blocking/criticalUnorderd context along the global one, or at some point expose an implementation. But this is also out of scope of the PR.
>> * hierachy of the Context implementations are cleaned up a bit [2]
>> 
>> The JDKContext is now just a holder of ClaimedFDs, I'll address this in a follow-up that depends on this Context follow-up.
>> 
>> [1] https://github.com/openjdk/crac/pull/60#issuecomment-1545588281
>> [2] https://github.com/openjdk/crac/pull/60#discussion_r1185510445
>
> Anton Kozlov has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
> 
>   Update

I don't agree with some of your conclusions and handling some deficiencies in a follow-ups, but I guess this is as far as we can get here. Therefore approved, let's move on.

I hope that https://github.com/openjdk/crac/pull/64 can be addressed soon to fix on losing stack traces and messages from CheckpointException.

test/jdk/jdk/crac/ContextOrderTest.java line 147:

> 145:                         thread.interrupt();
> 146:                         thread.join(TimeUnit.NANOSECONDS.toMillis(deadline - System.nanoTime()));
> 147:                         if (thread.getState() == Thread.State.WAITING) {

I think you wanted to remove printing the stack traces here, too.

-------------

Marked as reviewed by rvansa at github.com (no known OpenJDK username).

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/crac/pull/74#pullrequestreview-1462590184
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/crac/pull/74#discussion_r1218100148