Review + pull request: update FJP

[Mike Duigou]

Pushed.


On Oct 30 2012, at 12:14 , Aleksey Shipilev wrote:

> Please see the updated version at:
> http://shipilev.net/pub/jdk/lambda/20121029-fjp-update-3.patch.gz
> 
> -Aleksey.
> 
> On 10/30/2012 07:38 PM, Aleksey Shipilev wrote:
>> It turns out, there's the final version of the new update to FJP coming
>> to jsr166. Please hold on while I'm updating the patch.
>> 
>> -Alesey.
>> 
>> On 10/30/2012 03:44 PM, Aleksey Shipilev wrote:
>>> Sure, but I think lambda/lambda is already ahead, and for a reason:
>>> performance investigations for lambdas require latest and greatest code.
>>> In this particular case, this involves more changes in lambda code itself.
>>> 
>>> The jsr166 -> jdk8 -> lambda turnaround is longer than bearable for
>>> active development.
>>> 
>>> -Aleksey.
>>> 
>>> On 10/30/2012 03:41 PM, David Holmes wrote:
>>>> Aleksey,
>>>> 
>>>> There are plans to sync up jdk8 with latest jsr166 changes. Once that
>>>> happens they can appear in the lambda repos too.
>>>> 
>>>> David
>>>> 
>>>> On 30/10/2012 8:50 PM, Aleksey Shipilev wrote:
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>> 
>>>>> Please consider pulling up the update for new ForkJoinPool from jsr166.
>>>>> Doug had implemented a few features which are to provide much better
>>>>> wakeup performance. (Brian, this is the same patch I've cc'ed you
>>>>> before).
>>>>> 
>>>>> Here's the patch against JDK:
>>>>>  http://shipilev.net/pub/jdk/lambda/20121029-fjp-update-2.patch.gz
>>>>> 
>>>>> Testing:
>>>>>  - custom builds on Linux x86_64;
>>>>>  - decomposition performance benchmarks;
>>>>>  - fjp-trace logs
>>>>> 
>>>>> I could generate the webrev, if that is more appropriate.
>>>>> 
>>>>> -Aleksey
>>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
> 
>