RFR(S): 8229212 clear up CHECK_OWNER confusion in objectMonitor.cpp

[Daniel D. Daugherty]

Greetings,

Updated the fix based on David H's review.

Incremental webrev URL:

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dcubed/8229212-webrev/1_for_jdk14.inc/

Full webrev URL:

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dcubed/8229212-webrev/1_for_jdk14.full/

Thanks, in advance, for any comments, questions or suggestions.

Dan


On 8/8/19 10:25 AM, Daniel D. Daugherty wrote:
> Greetings,
>
> Discussions with David Holmes about ObjectMonitors revealed a bit of
> a mess with the CHECK_OWNER macro and the ObjectMonitor::check() and
> ObjectMonitor::check_slow() functions. I have a small fix to clean up
> this bit of messy code.
>
> The bug URL:
>
>     JDK-8229212 clear up CHECK_OWNER confusion in objectMonitor.cpp
>     https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8229212
>
> The webrev URL:
>
>     http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dcubed/8229212-webrev/0_for_jdk14/
>
> Summary of the fix:
>
>     Merge the CHECK_OWNER macro and the ObjectMonitor::check() and
>     ObjectMonitor::check_slow() functions into a new function:
>
>         ObjectMonitor::check_owner_and_throw_IMSE_if_not()
>
>     Update the CHECK_OWNER and check() call sites to use
>     check_owner_and_throw_IMSE_if_not(). Update the comments
>     to make the intended semantics clear.
>
> Also included a new test for when Object.wait(), Object.notify()
> and Object.notifyAll() are called a thread that doesn't own the
> Java monitor.
>
> Test with Mach5 Tier[1-3] on the usual Oracle platforms. Verified
> that the new test passes on all Oracle platforms. It's a Tier1
> test but its duration is < 1s on every platform.
>
> Thanks, in advance, for any comments, questions or suggestions.
>
> Dan
>
>