Switch ControlWord mutex to actual reentrant mutex #3922
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
What an unfortunate thing to not be able to trust 😬 |
PeterJohnson
approved these changes
Jan 15, 2022
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
It seems like the JVM does not handle recursive calls to object monitor based locks correctly. A few bugs in the past have been reported to have caused deadlocks if this occurs. It looks like the version of Java we use is fixed, but there could be other bugs, and it seems like this area of the code isn't tested much. Based on the stacks reported in #3896, it really seems like this is occurring. So we're going to attempt to switch to explicit mutex based classes, which shouldn't have bugs like this, and we will see if that fixes the issue.