It is possible that the execution of these two statements is interweaved:
Thread 1: a.methodA(b); //inside the constructor
Thread 2: b.methodB(a); //inside run()
to execute a.methodA()
, Thread 1 will need to obtain the lock on the A
object.
to execute b.methodB()
, Thread 2 will need to obtain the lock on the B
object.
For Thread 1's methodA()
to then be able to call the sychronized method on the b
instance, it will need to obtain the lock on b
being held by Thread 2, which will cause Thread 1 to wait until that lock is freed.
For Thread2's methodB()
to be able to call the synchronized method on the a
instance, it will need to obtain the lock being held on a
by Thread 1 - which will cause Thread 2 to wait as well.
Since each thread is holding a lock that the other thread wants, a deadlock will occur where neither thread is able to obtain the lock it wants, and neither thread will release the locks that it does hold.
It's important to understand that this code will not produce a deadlock 100% of the time you run it - only when the four crucial steps (Thread1 holds A's lock and tries to obtain B, which Thread 2 holds B's lock and tries to obtain A's) are executed in a certain order. Run this code enough times and that order is bound to happen though.
与恶龙缠斗过久,自身亦成为恶龙;凝视深渊过久,深渊将回以凝视…