/*
* DO NOT ALTER OR REMOVE COPYRIGHT NOTICES OR THIS FILE HEADER.
*
* This code is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it
* under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 2 only, as
* published by the Free Software Foundation. Oracle designates this
* particular file as subject to the "Classpath" exception as provided
* by Oracle in the LICENSE file that accompanied this code.
*
* This code is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, but WITHOUT
* ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of MERCHANTABILITY or
* FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the GNU General Public License
* version 2 for more details (a copy is included in the LICENSE file that
* accompanied this code).
*
* You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License version
* 2 along with this work; if not, write to the Free Software Foundation,
* Inc., 51 Franklin St, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA 02110-1301 USA.
*
* Please contact Oracle, 500 Oracle Parkway, Redwood Shores, CA 94065 USA
* or visit www.oracle.com if you need additional information or have any
* questions.
*/
/*
* This file is available under and governed by the GNU General Public
* License version 2 only, as published by the Free Software Foundation.
* However, the following notice accompanied the original version of this
* file:
*
* Written by Doug Lea with assistance from members of JCP JSR-166
* Expert Group and released to the public domain, as explained at
* http://creativecommons.org/licenses/publicdomain
*/
package java.util.concurrent.locks;
import java.util.concurrent.TimeUnit;
/**
* {@code Lock} implementations provide more extensive locking
* operations than can be obtained using {@code synchronized} methods
* and statements. They allow more flexible structuring, may have
* quite different properties, and may support multiple associated
* {@link Condition} objects.
*
* <p>A lock is a tool for controlling access to a shared resource by
* multiple threads. Commonly, a lock provides exclusive access to a
* shared resource: only one thread at a time can acquire the lock and
* all access to the shared resource requires that the lock be
* acquired first. However, some locks may allow concurrent access to
* a shared resource, such as the read lock of a {@link ReadWriteLock}.
*
* <p>The use of {@code synchronized} methods or statements provides
* access to the implicit monitor lock associated with every object, but
* forces all lock acquisition and release to occur in a block-structured way:
* when multiple locks are acquired they must be released in the opposite
* order, and all locks must be released in the same lexical scope in which
* they were acquired.
*
* <p>While the scoping mechanism for {@code synchronized} methods
* and statements makes it much easier to program with monitor locks,
* and helps avoid many common programming errors involving locks,
* there are occasions where you need to work with locks in a more
* flexible way. For example, some algorithms for traversing
* concurrently accessed data structures require the use of
* "hand-over-hand" or "chain locking": you
* acquire the lock of node A, then node B, then release A and acquire
* C, then release B and acquire D and so on. Implementations of the
* {@code Lock} interface enable the use of such techniques by
* allowing a lock to be acquired and released in different scopes,
* and allowing multiple locks to be acquired and released in any
* order.
*
* <p>With this increased flexibility comes additional
* responsibility. The absence of block-structured locking removes the
* automatic release of locks that occurs with {@code synchronized}
* methods and statements. In most cases, the following idiom
* should be used:
*
* <pre><tt> Lock l = ...;
* l.lock();
* try {
* // access the resource protected by this lock
* } finally {
* l.unlock();
* }
* </tt></pre>
*
* When locking and unlocking occur in different scopes, care must be
* taken to ensure that all code that is executed while the lock is
* held is protected by try-finally or try-catch to ensure that the
* lock is released when necessary.
*
* <p>{@code Lock} implementations provide additional functionality
* over the use of {@code synchronized} methods and statements by
* providing a non-blocking attempt to acquire a lock ({@link
* #tryLock()}), an attempt to acquire the lock that can be
* interrupted ({@link #lockInterruptibly}, and an attempt to acquire
* the lock that can timeout ({@link #tryLock(long, TimeUnit)}).
*
* <p>A {@code Lock} class can also provide behavior and semantics
* that is quite different from that of the implicit monitor lock,
* such as guaranteed ordering, non-reentrant usage, or deadlock
* detection. If an implementation provides such specialized semantics
* then the implementation must document those semantics.
*
* <p>Note that {@code Lock} instances are just normal objects and can
* themselves be used as the target in a {@code synchronized} statement.
* Acquiring the
* monitor lock of a {@code Lock} instance has no specified relationship
* with invoking any of the {@link #lock} methods of that instance.
* It is recommended that to avoid confusion you never use {@code Lock}
* instances in this way, except within their own implementation.
*
* <p>Except where noted, passing a {@code null} value for any
* parameter will result in a {@link NullPointerException} being
* thrown.
*
* <h3>Memory Synchronization</h3>
*
* <p>All {@code Lock} implementations <em>must</em> enforce the same
* memory synchronization semantics as provided by the built-in monitor
* lock, as described in <a href="http://java.sun.com/docs/books/jls/">
* The Java Language Specification, Third Edition (17.4 Memory Model)</a>:
* <ul>
* <li>A successful {@code lock} operation has the same memory
* synchronization effects as a successful <em>Lock</em> action.
* <li>A successful {@code unlock} operation has the same
* memory synchronization effects as a successful <em>Unlock</em> action.
* </ul>
*
* Unsuccessful locking and unlocking operations, and reentrant
* locking/unlocking operations, do not require any memory
* synchronization effects.
*
* <h3>Implementation Considerations</h3>
*
* <p> The three forms of lock acquisition (interruptible,
* non-interruptible, and timed) may differ in their performance
* characteristics, ordering guarantees, or other implementation
* qualities. Further, the ability to interrupt the <em>ongoing</em>
* acquisition of a lock may not be available in a given {@code Lock}
* class. Consequently, an implementation is not required to define
* exactly the same guarantees or semantics for all three forms of
* lock acquisition, nor is it required to support interruption of an
* ongoing lock acquisition. An implementation is required to clearly
* document the semantics and guarantees provided by each of the
* locking methods. It must also obey the interruption semantics as
* defined in this interface, to the extent that interruption of lock
* acquisition is supported: which is either totally, or only on
* method entry.
*
* <p>As interruption generally implies cancellation, and checks for
* interruption are often infrequent, an implementation can favor responding
* to an interrupt over normal method return. This is true even if it can be
* shown that the interrupt occurred after another action may have unblocked
* the thread. An implementation should document this behavior.
*
* @see ReentrantLock
* @see Condition
* @see ReadWriteLock
*
* @since 1.5
* @author Doug Lea
*/
public interface Lock {
/**
* Acquires the lock.
*
* <p>If the lock is not available then the current thread becomes
* disabled for thread scheduling purposes and lies dormant until the
* lock has been acquired.
*
* <p><b>Implementation Considerations</b>
*
* <p>A {@code Lock} implementation may be able to detect erroneous use
* of the lock, such as an invocation that would cause deadlock, and
* may throw an (unchecked) exception in such circumstances. The
* circumstances and the exception type must be documented by that
* {@code Lock} implementation.
*/
void lock();
/**
* Acquires the lock unless the current thread is
* {@linkplain Thread#interrupt interrupted}.
*
* <p>Acquires the lock if it is available and returns immediately.
*
* <p>If the lock is not available then the current thread becomes
* disabled for thread scheduling purposes and lies dormant until
* one of two things happens:
*
* <ul>
* <li>The lock is acquired by the current thread; or
* <li>Some other thread {@linkplain Thread#interrupt interrupts} the
* current thread, and interruption of lock acquisition is supported.
* </ul>
*
* <p>If the current thread:
* <ul>
* <li>has its interrupted status set on entry to this method; or
* <li>is {@linkplain Thread#interrupt interrupted} while acquiring the
* lock, and interruption of lock acquisition is supported,
* </ul>
* then {@link InterruptedException} is thrown and the current thread's
* interrupted status is cleared.
*
* <p><b>Implementation Considerations</b>
*
* <p>The ability to interrupt a lock acquisition in some
* implementations may not be possible, and if possible may be an
* expensive operation. The programmer should be aware that this
* may be the case. An implementation should document when this is
* the case.
*
* <p>An implementation can favor responding to an interrupt over
* normal method return.
*
* <p>A {@code Lock} implementation may be able to detect
* erroneous use of the lock, such as an invocation that would
* cause deadlock, and may throw an (unchecked) exception in such
* circumstances. The circumstances and the exception type must
* be documented by that {@code Lock} implementation.
*
* @throws InterruptedException if the current thread is
* interrupted while acquiring the lock (and interruption
* of lock acquisition is supported).
*/
void lockInterruptibly() throws InterruptedException;
/**
* Acquires the lock only if it is free at the time of invocation.
*
* <p>Acquires the lock if it is available and returns immediately
* with the value {@code true}.
* If the lock is not available then this method will return
* immediately with the value {@code false}.
*
* <p>A typical usage idiom for this method would be:
* <pre>
* Lock lock = ...;
* if (lock.tryLock()) {
* try {
* // manipulate protected state
* } finally {
* lock.unlock();
* }
* } else {
* // perform alternative actions
* }
* </pre>
* This usage ensures that the lock is unlocked if it was acquired, and
* doesn't try to unlock if the lock was not acquired.
*
* @return {@code true} if the lock was acquired and
* {@code false} otherwise
*/
boolean tryLock();
/**
* Acquires the lock if it is free within the given waiting time and the
* current thread has not been {@linkplain Thread#interrupt interrupted}.
*
* <p>If the lock is available this method returns immediately
* with the value {@code true}.
* If the lock is not available then
* the current thread becomes disabled for thread scheduling
* purposes and lies dormant until one of three things happens:
* <ul>
* <li>The lock is acquired by the current thread; or
* <li>Some other thread {@linkplain Thread#interrupt interrupts} the
* current thread, and interruption of lock acquisition is supported; or
* <li>The specified waiting time elapses
* </ul>
*
* <p>If the lock is acquired then the value {@code true} is returned.
*
* <p>If the current thread:
* <ul>
* <li>has its interrupted status set on entry to this method; or
* <li>is {@linkplain Thread#interrupt interrupted} while acquiring
* the lock, and interruption of lock acquisition is supported,
* </ul>
* then {@link InterruptedException} is thrown and the current thread's
* interrupted status is cleared.
*
* <p>If the specified waiting time elapses then the value {@code false}
* is returned.
* If the time is
* less than or equal to zero, the method will not wait at all.
*
* <p><b>Implementation Considerations</b>
*
* <p>The ability to interrupt a lock acquisition in some implementations
* may not be possible, and if possible may
* be an expensive operation.
* The programmer should be aware that this may be the case. An
* implementation should document when this is the case.
*
* <p>An implementation can favor responding to an interrupt over normal
* method return, or reporting a timeout.
*
* <p>A {@code Lock} implementation may be able to detect
* erroneous use of the lock, such as an invocation that would cause
* deadlock, and may throw an (unchecked) exception in such circumstances.
* The circumstances and the exception type must be documented by that
* {@code Lock} implementation.
*
* @param time the maximum time to wait for the lock
* @param unit the time unit of the {@code time} argument
* @return {@code true} if the lock was acquired and {@code false}
* if the waiting time elapsed before the lock was acquired
*
* @throws InterruptedException if the current thread is interrupted
* while acquiring the lock (and interruption of lock
* acquisition is supported)
*/
boolean tryLock(long time, TimeUnit unit) throws InterruptedException;
/**
* Releases the lock.
*
* <p><b>Implementation Considerations</b>
*
* <p>A {@code Lock} implementation will usually impose
* restrictions on which thread can release a lock (typically only the
* holder of the lock can release it) and may throw
* an (unchecked) exception if the restriction is violated.
* Any restrictions and the exception
* type must be documented by that {@code Lock} implementation.
*/
void unlock();
/**
* Returns a new {@link Condition} instance that is bound to this
* {@code Lock} instance.
*
* <p>Before waiting on the condition the lock must be held by the
* current thread.
* A call to {@link Condition#await()} will atomically release the lock
* before waiting and re-acquire the lock before the wait returns.
*
* <p><b>Implementation Considerations</b>
*
* <p>The exact operation of the {@link Condition} instance depends on
* the {@code Lock} implementation and must be documented by that
* implementation.
*
* @return A new {@link Condition} instance for this {@code Lock} instance
* @throws UnsupportedOperationException if this {@code Lock}
* implementation does not support conditions
*/
Condition newCondition();
}