According to the Java Language Specification, §17.3, "Sleep and Yield" [JLS 20112013],
It is important to note that neither
Thread.sleep
norThread.yield
have any synchronization semantics. In particular, the compiler does not have to flush writes cached in registers out to shared memory before a call toThread.sleep
orThread.yield
, nor does the compiler have to reload values cached in registers after a call toThread.sleep
orThread.yield
.
Code that depends bases its concurrency safety on thread suspension or that yields to processes that
- flush Flush cached registers,
- reload Reload any values,
- Or provide any happens-before relationships when execution resumes,
is incorrect and is consequently disallowed. Programs must ensure that communication between threads has proper synchronization, happens-before, and safe publication semantics.
Noncompliant Code Example (sleep()
)
This noncompliant code attempts to use the nonvolatile primitive Boolean member done
as a flag to terminate execution of a thread. A separate thread sets done
to true
by calling the shutdown()
method.
Code Block | ||
---|---|---|
| ||
final class ControlledStop implements Runnable { private boolean done = false; @Override public void run() { while (!done) { try { Thread.sleep(1000); } catch (InterruptedException e) { Thread.currentThread().interrupt(); // Reset interrupted status Thread.currentThread().interrupt(); } } } public void shutdown() { this.done = true; } } |
However, the compiler The compiler, in this case, is free to read the field this.done
once and to reuse the cached value in each execution of the loop. Consequently, the while
loop might never terminate, even when another thread calls the shutdown()
method to change the value of this.done
[JLS 20112013]. This error could have resulted from the programmer incorrectly assuming that the call to Thread.sleep()
would cause causes cached values to be reloaded.
Compliant Solution (Volatile Flag)
This compliant solution declares the flag field volatile
to ensure that updates to its value are made visible across multiple threads:
Code Block | ||
---|---|---|
| ||
final class ControlledStop implements Runnable { private volatile boolean done = false; // ... @Override public void run() { //... } // ... } |
The volatile flag keyword establishes a happens-before relationship between this thread and any other thread that sets done
.
Compliant Solution (Thread.interrupt()
)
A better solution for methods that call sleep()
is to use thread interruption, which causes the sleeping thread to wake immediately and handle the interruption. Note that the interrupting thread must know which thread to interrupt; logic for tracking this relationship has been elided.
Code Block | ||
---|---|---|
| ||
final class ControlledStop implements Runnable { @Override public void run() { // Record current thread, so others can interrupt it myThread = currentThread(); while (!Thread.interrupted()) { try { Thread.sleep(1000); } catch (InterruptedException e) { Thread.currentThread().interrupt(); } } } public void shutdown(Thread th) { th.interrupt(); } } |
Note that the interrupting thread must know which thread to interrupt; logic for tracking this relationship has been omitted from this solution.
Noncompliant Code Example (getState()
)
This noncompliant code example contains a doSomething()
method that starts a thread. The thread supports interruption by checking a flag and blocks waiting waits until notified. The stop()
method checks to see whether the thread is blocked on the wait; if so, it sets the flag to true and notifies the thread so that the thread can terminate.
...
Unfortunately, the stop()
method incorrectly uses the Thread.getState()
method to check whether the thread is blocked and has not terminated before delivering the notification. Using the Thread.getState()
method for synchronization control, such as checking whether a thread is blocked on a wait, is inappropriate. Java Virtual Machines (JVMs) are permitted to implement blocking using spin-waiting; consequently, a thread can be blocked without entering the WAITING
or TIMED_WAITING
state [Goetz 2006a2006]. Because the thread may never enter the WAITING
state, the stop()
method might fail to terminate the thread.
If doSomething()
and stop()
are called from different threads, the stop()
method could fail to see the initialized thread
, even though doSomething()
was called earlier, unless there is a happens-before relationship between the two calls. If the two methods are invoked by the same thread, they automatically have a happens-before relationship and consequently cannot encounter this problem.
Compliant Solution
This compliant solution removes the check for determining whether the thread is in the WAITING
state. This check is unnecessary because invoking notifyAll()
affects only threads that are blocked on a an invocation of wait()
invocation.:
Code Block | ||
---|---|---|
| ||
public class Waiter { // ... private Thread thread; private volatile boolean flag; private final Object lock = new Object(); public boolean stop() { if (thread != null) { synchronized (lock) { flag = true; lock.notifyAll(); } return true; } return false; } } |
Applicability
Relying on the Thread
class's sleep()
, yield()
, and getState()
methods for synchronization control can cause unexpected behavior.
...
Bibliography
...