Skip to main content
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
RE: [rap-dev] UICallBackManager 
Hello 

Yes, It is a solution. But use this implementation of SyncRunnable:

static final class SyncRunnable extends RunnableBase {
    private final Object lock;
    private boolean terminated;
    SyncRunnable( final Runnable runnable ) {
      super( runnable );
      lock = new Object();
    }
    void run() {
      try {
        super.run();
      }
      finally {
        synchronized( lock ) {
          terminated = true;
          lock.notifyAll();
        }
      }
    }
    void block() {
      synchronized( lock ) {
        if( !terminated ) {
          try {
            lock.wait();
          } catch( final InterruptedException e ) {
            // stop waiting
          }
        }
      }
    }
  }

There is only one difference: the methid run should notify all objects that
waits for lock monitor even if it executed with an exception.

Thank you, Igor

-----Original Message-----
From: rap-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:rap-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Rudiger Herrmann
Sent: Monday, April 20, 2009 3:30 PM
To: RAP project development-related communication
Subject: Re: [rap-dev] UICallBackManager

mail.apptech.nichost.ru wrote:
> Hello
> 
> Yes, it is the same bug
does the patch solve the problem?

> 
> Thank you, Igor
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: rap-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:rap-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] 
> On Behalf Of Rudiger Herrmann
> Sent: Sunday, April 19, 2009 1:46 AM
> To: RAP project development-related communication
> Subject: Re: [rap-dev] UICallBackManager
> 
> 
> created this bug since I am not entirely sure that the issue is the 
> same as reported in bug 220981.
>    272811: Display#addSync() waits infinitely under
>    certain circumstances
>    https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=272811
> There is a patch that should solve the problem and also changes the 
> sync-lock in addSync().
> 
> Could you try it out and give feedback, either here or on the bug?
> 
> Rüdiger
> 
> 
> Rüdiger Herrmann wrote:
>> 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
> _______________________________________________
> 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

Back to the top