RFR(S): 8152358 - code and comment cleanups found during the hunt for 8077392

[Carsten Varming]

Dear Dan,

I think I figured out why what the comment " The owner can't die or unwind
past the lock while our INFLATING object is in the mark" means. The
displaced mark word is in the first lock on the stack of the thread owning
the lock. That mean the only case to worry about the the non-recursive exit
which is handled by a call to inflate as INFLATING is different from the
pointer to the lock. It would be nice with a comment explaining why the
recursive exit does not need to wait, i.e., the object mark word always
points to the first lock on the stack of the thread currently owning the
lock.

Anyway, the clean-up looks good.

Carsten

On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 12:07 PM, Claes Redestad <claes.redestad at oracle.com>
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On 2016-03-29 17:56, Carsten Varming wrote:
>
>> Quick question: Is it time to remove all those unused perf
>> variables: _sync_EmptyNotifications, _sync_Notifications,
>> _sync_SlowEnter, _sync_SlowExit, _sync_SlowNotify,
>> _sync_SlowNotifyAll, _sync_FailedSpins, _sync_SuccessfulSpins,
>> _sync_PrivateA, _sync_PrivateB, _sync_MonInCirculation,
>> and _sync_MonScavenged.
>>
>
> there's already an RFE for that:
> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068593
>
> Seems I didn't put _sync_Notifications on the list, maybe just an
> oversight, or it was
> actually used at the time.
>
> /Claes
>