8373649: Convert simple AtomicAccess usage in ConcurrentHashTable to use Atomic<T>

[kimbarrett]

Please review this conversion of simple AtomicAccess usage in
ConcurrentHashTable to use Atomic. This is split out from the complete
conversion to simplify reviewing and testing.

Testing: mach5 tier1-3

---

Progress

• Change must be properly reviewed (1 review required, with at least 1 Reviewer)
• Change must not contain extraneous whitespace
• Commit message must refer to an issue

Issue

• JDK-8373649: Convert simple AtomicAccess usage in ConcurrentHashTable to use Atomic<T> (Enhancement - P4)

Reviewers

• Thomas Schatzl (@tschatzl - Reviewer)
• Ivan Walulya (@walulyai - Reviewer)

Reviewing

Using git

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/28816/head:pull/28816
$ git checkout pull/28816

Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/28816
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/28816/head

Using Skara CLI tools

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 28816

View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 28816

Using diff file

Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/28816.diff

Using Webrev

Link to Webrev Comment

[bridgekeeper]

👋 Welcome back kbarrett! A progress list of the required criteria for merging this PR into master will be added to the body of your pull request. There are additional pull request commands available for use with this pull request.

[openjdk]

@kimbarrett This change now passes all automated pre-integration checks.

ℹ️ This project also has non-automated pre-integration requirements. Please see the file CONTRIBUTING.md for details.

After integration, the commit message for the final commit will be:

8373649: Convert simple AtomicAccess usage in ConcurrentHashTable to use Atomic<T>

Reviewed-by: tschatzl, iwalulya

You can use pull request commands such as /summary, /contributor and /issue to adjust it as needed.

At the time when this comment was updated there had been 10 new commits pushed to the master branch:

• 629bf20: 8371408: [Linux] VM.info output for container information is confusing
• 3559eec: 8373428: Refine variables with the same name in nested scopes in PhaseChaitin::gather_lrg_masks
• ad6611a: 8371347: Move the ObjectMonitorTable to a separate new file
• ... and 7 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/d03e7cb87ae04c1d32559b4a49d71d32f9d616a8...master

As there are no conflicts, your changes will automatically be rebased on top of these commits when integrating. If you prefer to avoid this automatic rebasing, please check the documentation for the /integrate command for further details.

➡️ To integrate this PR with the above commit message to the master branch, type /integrate in a new comment.

[openjdk]

@kimbarrett The following label will be automatically applied to this pull request:

• hotspot

When this pull request is ready to be reviewed, an "RFR" email will be sent to the corresponding mailing list. If you would like to change these labels, use the /label pull request command.

[mlbridge]

Webrevs

• 00: Full (839ac610)

[kimbarrett]

Thanks for reviews @tschatzl and @walulyai

[kimbarrett]

/integrate

[openjdk]

Going to push as commit 3f33eaa.
Since your change was applied there have been 20 commits pushed to the master branch:

• 1748737: 8372988: Test runtime/Nestmates/membership/TestNestHostErrorWithMultiThread.java failed: Unexpected interrupt
• 317788f: 8360160: ubuntu-22-04 machine is failing client tests
• 6aeabd4: 8370910: Cleanup terminology of UUID vs Global Identifiers in UUID
• ... and 17 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/d03e7cb87ae04c1d32559b4a49d71d32f9d616a8...master

Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts.

[openjdk]

@kimbarrett Pushed as commit 3f33eaa.

💡 You may see a message that your pull request was closed with unmerged commits. This can be safely ignored.