[External] : Re: Native interop with Virtual Threads

[Danish Nawab]

> Go also locks the carrier thread in this arbitrary native case - and simply spawns a new one if needed.

Do you have a source for this information? I would like to develop an understanding of the similarities/differences between the two implementations.
________________________________
From: Robert Engels <rengels at ix.netcom.com>
Sent: Monday, June 26, 2023 4:11 PM
To: Ron Pressler <ron.pressler at oracle.com>
Cc: Danish Nawab <dnawab at outlook.com>; loom-dev at openjdk.org <loom-dev at openjdk.org>
Subject: Re: [External] : Re: Native interop with Virtual Threads

Go also locks the carrier thread in this arbitrary native case - and simply spawns a new one if needed.

> On Jun 26, 2023, at 6:02 PM, Ron Pressler <ron.pressler at oracle.com> wrote:
>
> 
>
>> On 26 Jun 2023, at 17:45, Danish Nawab <dnawab at outlook.com> wrote:
>>
>> Thanks Ron.
>>
>> What about native code that doesn’t make an upcall but does a blocking operation directly (via OS syscalls or similar)? Are such cases also rare?
>
> Yes. But supporting those — even if there was reason to — would have been even harder, as Java has no control or knowledge over what native code does.
>
>>
>> What would be the advice if someone is making blocking calls from their downcalls? It might not always be possible to rewrite it in Java.
>
> If those operations are both frequent and lengthy, they shouldn’t be done on virtual threads.
>
> — Ron
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/loom-dev/attachments/20230627/cf584e7e/attachment.htm>