Re: JavaMemoryModel: Weak fairness in the Java memory model

From: Bill Pugh (pugh@cs.umd.edu)
Date: Wed Apr 14 2004 - 09:54:49 EDT


Since we won't be requiring any thread scheduling fairness,
a JVM with non-preemptive thread scheduling is fine.

It will not raise any issues for J2ME.

        Bill

On Apr 14, 2004, at 1:41 AM, Doron Rajwan wrote:

>
> Does it means that anything less than preemptive
> multitasking won't do?
>
> Is J2ME OK with this?
>
> Doron.
>
>
> --- Bill Pugh <pugh@cs.umd.edu> wrote:
>> OK, we're going to have to adjust this.
>>
>> Jeremy, Sarita and I are working on something, give
>> us another day
>> or so to sanity check it.
>>
>> The intent is still the same:
>> * Not require any thread scheduling fairness
>> * Prevent transformations such as hoisting
>> a volatile read out of a loop (in the general
>> case).
>>
>> Bill
>>
>> -------------------------------
>> JavaMemoryModel mailing list -
> http://www.cs.umd.edu/~pugh/java/memoryModel
>
>
> =====
> Doron Rajwan, mailto:doron@rajwan.org
>
> -------------------------------
> JavaMemoryModel mailing list -
> http://www.cs.umd.edu/~pugh/java/memoryModel

-------------------------------
JavaMemoryModel mailing list - http://www.cs.umd.edu/~pugh/java/memoryModel



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Oct 13 2005 - 07:01:04 EDT