Re: [rap-dev] UICallBackManager

[Rüdiger Herrmann <rherrmann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Igor,

thanks for the suggestion. Though I don't quite understand how the 
while(!isLocked) loop solves the problem.
Could you explain that? Or attach a patch to the bug mentioned before?

Thanks
Rüdiger


mail.apptech.nichost.ru wrote:
> Hello 
>
> Maybe I can do something like this:
>
> 1) Add boolean field SyncRunnable#isLocked
>
> 2) Create runLocked method in SyncRunnable:
>
>     void runLocked() {
>       synchronized( lock ) {
>         while(!isLocked) {
>           try {
>             wait();
>           } catch( InterruptedException e ) {
>             // Do nothing
>           }
>         }
>         isLocked = false;
>       }
>       super.run();
>       synchronized( lock ) {
>         lock.notifyAll();
>       }
>     }
>
> 3) In UICallBackManager#processNextRunnableInUIThread change runnable.run()
> to 
>     if (runnable instanceof SyncRunnable) {
>       ( ( SyncRunnable )runnable ).runLocked();
>     }
>     else {
>       runnable.run();
>     }
>
>
> Whis this changes I can solve my problem (the problem that I described). I
> tried not to change logic for other types of runnables, so the code listed
> above is not very clean, but it works.
>
> Thank you, Igor
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: rap-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:rap-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On
> Behalf Of Rudiger Herrmann
> Sent: Wednesday, April 08, 2009 1:51 PM
> To: RAP project development-related communication
> Subject: Re: [rap-dev] UICallBackManager
>
>
> Igor,
>
> unfortunately fixing this issue isn't that easy. As stated in the comment,
> synchronizing on runnablesLock may lead to a deadlock.
> See also this bugzilla entry:
>    220981: Fix synchronization Problem in UICallBackManager#addSync()
>    https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=220981
>
> Cheers,
> Rüdiger
>
> mail.apptech.nichost.ru wrote:
> > Hello
> >
> > I have a question about UICallBackManager. There are a set of 
> > functions that synchronized with runnablesLock, but not the addSync 
> > function. Is it correct?
> >
> > I reproduced an incorrect situation. I have a thread that locked in 
> > SyncRunnable#block method, but I have an empty 
> > UICallBackManager#runnables list. It seems that the corresponding 
> > SyncRunnable of my thread was removed from UICallBackManager#runnables 
> > before my runnable was blocked in SyncRunnable#block method.
> >
> > Is it a bug and can I fix this bug by adding synchronization of 
> > runnablesLock? Threre is a comment that notifies about possible 
> > problems with such aproach.
> >
> > Thank you,
> > Igor
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > rap-dev mailing list
> > rap-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/rap-dev
> _______________________________________________
> rap-dev mailing list
> rap-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/rap-dev
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rap-dev mailing list
> rap-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/rap-dev