From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 22022 invoked by alias); 7 Apr 2004 05:45:22 -0000 Mailing-List: contact mauve-discuss-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: mauve-discuss-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 22003 invoked from network); 7 Apr 2004 05:45:18 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO email2.peakpeak.com) (207.174.178.92) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 7 Apr 2004 05:45:18 -0000 Received: (qmail 7083 invoked from network); 7 Apr 2004 05:47:02 -0000 Received: from tf0229.peakpeak.com (HELO fleche.redhat.com) ([204.144.239.229]) (envelope-sender ) by email2.peakpeak.com (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP for ; 7 Apr 2004 05:47:02 -0000 Received: by fleche.redhat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id BE2B54F82D4; Tue, 6 Apr 2004 23:31:38 -0600 (MDT) To: Archie Cobbs Cc: Sascha Brawer , mauve-discuss@sources.redhat.com, commit-classpath@gnu.org Subject: Re: Mauve patch References: <200404061346.i36DkRdh019920@arch20m.dellroad.org> From: Tom Tromey Reply-To: tromey@redhat.com X-Attribution: Tom X-Zippy: Look DEEP into the OPENINGS!! Do you see any ELVES or EDSELS... or a HIGHBALL??... Date: Wed, 07 Apr 2004 05:45:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <200404061346.i36DkRdh019920@arch20m.dellroad.org> Message-ID: <87vfkc4amd.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.3.50 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-SW-Source: 2004-q2/txt/msg00010.txt.bz2 >>>>> "Archie" == Archie Cobbs writes: Archie> This patch doesn't guarantee anything, and in general it's impossible Archie> to make this test "correct" because the spec allows finalization and Archie> reference enqueuing to happen after arbitrarily long delays. Yeah, these tests are basically bogus. I thought I had removed them, but I guess I forgot. Archie> This patch simply makes the test "correct" for JC (and possibly Archie> some other VM(s) out there). Since there's no way to *ensure* the Archie> finalizer and reference enqueing thread(s) have run, we just try Archie> to give them every opportunity to do so before declaring that their Archie> work should be done. I think the patch is fine to go in. It certainly doesn't make the situation any worse. Perhaps it is better to just remove the test. Or make a new "unportable" section of Mauve, since some things seemingly can't be tested. Tom