Reviewer needed: backport of "4465490: Suspicious about double-check locking idiom being used in the code" into IcedTea6 HEAD

[Jiri Vanek]

On 02/24/2012 05:24 PM, Pavel Tisnovsky wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'd like to push following backport "4465490: Suspicious about double-check locking idiom being used in the code"
> into IcedTea6 HEAD. This backport is the second part of fixes for issue mentioned here
> http://icedtea.classpath.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=882
>
> hg diff containing patch + Makefile.am change + NEWS change are stored in an attachment.
>
> ChangeLog entry:
>
> 2012-02-24  Pavel Tisnovsky<ptisnovs at redhat.com>
>
>          * Makefile.am: Add new patch.
>          * NEWS: Mention backport.
>          * patches/openjdk/4465490-Suspicious_double-check_locking_idiom.patch:
>          Backport of 4465490: Suspicious about double-check locking idiom being
>          used in the code.
>
>
> Could anybody review this change please?
>
> Cheers,
> Pavel


I assume that volatile for private method which ahave alredy passed Oracles' review will cause no harm.
Thanx for this, J.

btw - isn't worthy to connect all three backport, which are connected with one purposes to one patch?
My recommendation is yes - What do you think?