RFR 8235678: Remove unnecessary calls to Thread::current() in MutexLocker calls

[Harold Seigel]

Thanks David!

Harold

On 1/15/2020 6:19 PM, David Holmes wrote:
> Hi Harold,
>
> That all seems fine to me.
>
> Thanks,
> David
>
> On 15/01/2020 10:57 pm, Harold Seigel wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Please review this new webrev that also makes Thread* the first 
>> argument to the relevant MutexLocker and MonitorLocker constructors 
>> as requested by Coleen.
>>
>> Updated Webrev: 
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~hseigel/bug_8235678.2/webrev/index.html
>>
>> Thanks, Harold
>>
>> On 1/14/2020 11:24 AM, coleen.phillimore at oracle.com wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Harold,
>>>
>>> I really wanted this change to move Thread to the first argument 
>>> like many of the other calls in the VM that take THREAD as an argument.
>>>
>>> Written like this:
>>>
>>> + MutexLocker mu(Threads_lock, THREAD);
>>>
>>>
>>> It's too easy for someone who's cut/pasting to think the last THREAD 
>>> argument should really be CHECK, which is completely wrong.
>>>
>>> Can you switch the arguments?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Coleen
>>>
>>> On 1/14/20 9:00 AM, Harold Seigel wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> Please review this small change, to reduce unnecessary calls to 
>>>> Thread::current() in MutexLocker calls, by passing the current 
>>>> thread as an argument.  A few ResoureMark declarations were also 
>>>> changed.
>>>>
>>>> Open Webrev: 
>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~hseigel/bug_8235678/webrev/index.html
>>>>
>>>> JBS Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8235678
>>>>
>>>> The fix was regression tested by running Mach5 tiers 1 and 2 tests 
>>>> and builds on Linux-x64, Solaris, Windows, and Mac OS X, by running 
>>>> Mach5 tiers 3-5 tests on Linux-x64, and JCK lang and VM tests on 
>>>> Linux-x64.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks, Harold
>>>>
>>>