RFR (S): CR 8004318/JEP 171 Fences intrinsics

[Aleksey Shipilev]

On 12/05/2012 06:36 PM, David Chase wrote:
> On 2012-12-05, at 8:56 AM, Aleksey Shipilev
> <aleksey.shipilev at oracle.com> wrote:
> 
>> Totally agree. Now to constructive side: are you up to actually
>> clean up Unsafe? *This* makes a perfect JEP to have the open
>> discussion about.
> 
> In theory, yes, in practice, I have to be sure that I won't be told
> this is not what I should be spending time on, and I am also
> sufficiently new to Openjdk that I am almost completely ignorant of
> process and even acronyms.  I'm still working towards getting
> committer rights.  But "Unsafe" as an implementation layer for safe
> languages, that I have decades of experience with.

Yes, sorry, under "you" I've meant the abstract reader who has the same
thoughts about Unsafe. This this what open source is all about, right?
You go ahead and suggest the improvements :) Basically, here:
 http://openjdk.java.net/jeps/1

>> Totally agree x2. Again, do we want to push away fences from Unsafe
>> to make the room for cleaning up Unsafe? If so, would be it better
>> to move fences to, say, sun.misc.Fences? Seems to fit the bill for
>> what you are suggesting of splitting up the Unsafe?
> 
> I'm on the (ahem) fence here.  I don't feel like ticking off Doug,
> deadlines are approaching, and I don't think this is the only wart in
> the Unsafe layer.  On the other hand, how hard could it be to stuff
> it all in some other class of sun.misc? 

As for the Fences, the effort is pretty minimal to move once we figure
out where to move. Less than one hour of work do to, mostly automatic.

-Aleksey.