You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@felix.apache.org by "Clement Escoffier (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org> on 2013/02/04 13:36:20 UTC
[jira] [Closed] (FELIX-3500) InstanceManager concurrency issue: "A
methodID cannot be associated with a method from the POJO class"
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX-3500?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]
Clement Escoffier closed FELIX-3500.
------------------------------------
> InstanceManager concurrency issue: "A methodID cannot be associated with a method from the POJO class"
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: FELIX-3500
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX-3500
> Project: Felix
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: iPOJO
> Affects Versions: ipojo-core-1.8.2
> Reporter: Francois Valdy
> Assignee: Clement Escoffier
> Fix For: ipojo-core-1.8.4
>
>
> InstanceManager.getMethodByID(String) claims to be thread-safe (or not to require synchronization) but is not.
> It results in random messages "A methodID cannot be associated with a method from the POJO class" (which were downgraded from ERROR to INFO), but has unknown side effect bugs (as it returns null for valid methods when that happens).
> If 2 threads call this method with the same parameter:
> - both won't find it in the cache (m_methods.get(methodId) == null)
> - one will register it: !m_methods.containsValue(mets[i]) is true
> - second thread will NOT register it (because the first one did, hence the value is in the map), and will return null <-- bug
> Other issues may occur from the fact that an HashMap (unsafe) is used without synchronization, for instance a well-known infinite loop.
> I think one fix (to keep the same method semantics) under J2SE 1.3 would be to:
> - use Hashtable instead of HashMap (safe as the value is never null)
> - replace the code within the loop by:
> if (m_methods.containsValue(mets[i]))
> {
> method = (Method) m_methods.get(methodId);
> if (method != null)
> {
> return method;
> }
> }
> else if (MethodMetadata.computeMethodId(mets[i]).equals(methodId))
> {
> // Store the new methodId
> m_methods.put(methodId, mets[i]);
> return mets[i];
> }
> However I'm not sure about the purpose of the containsValue check purpose (which is also very expensive as it traverses the entire map).
> Thanks.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira