RFR: 8166811: Missing memory fences between memory allocation and refinement

[Kim Barrett]

> On Nov 15, 2016, at 5:26 AM, Thomas Schatzl <thomas.schatzl at oracle.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> On Thu, 2016-11-10 at 13:20 -0500, Kim Barrett wrote:
>>> 
>>> On Nov 8, 2016, at 7:52 AM, Thomas Schatzl <thomas.schatzl at oracle.c
>>> om> wrote:
>>> On Tue, 2016-10-25 at 19:13 -0400, Kim Barrett wrote:
>>> - assuming this works due to other synchronization,
>> This is the critical point.  There *is* synchronization there.
> 
> Okay, thanks. I just wanted to make sure that we are aware of that we
> are using this other synchronization here.
> 
> Thanks. Again I was mostly worried about noting this reliance on
> previous synchronization down somewhere, even if it is only the mailing
> list.
> 
> It may be useful to note this in the code too. This would save the next
> one working on this code looking through old mailing list threads.
> 
> Maybe I am a bit overly concerned about making sure that these thoughts
> are provided in the proper place though. Or maybe everyone thinks that
> everything is clear :)

I've updated some comments to mention that external synchronization.

CR:
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8166811

Webrevs:
full: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~kbarrett/8166811/webrev.01/
incr: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~kbarrett/8166811/webrev.01.inc/

Also, since this set of changes is rather intertwined with the changes
for 8166607, here is a combined webrev for both:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~kbarrett/8166811/combined.01/

I think I'll do as Erik suggested and push the two together.