A DESCRIPTION OF THE PROBLEM :
The effect of the interruption in the context of the memory model is incorrectly described in the JLS Ch17.
We cannot confidently guess what is actually true.

First, 17.4.2 has a list that defines synchronization actions, but this does not contain interruptions and its observations. Later, 17.4.4 states that these actions can have synchronize-with relations. If these are not synchronization actions but still be able to have sw relations, it is a bit strange because 17.4.4 also says synchronize-with relations are induced by synchronization actions. (But I cannot conclude that it is a contradiction, because there is no 'all the' before the word 'synchronize-with relation', technically.)
Second, there is a crucial misstatement. The last of the list in 17.4.4 says that [[an interruption synchronizes-with "any" point where any other thread determines that it has been interrupted]]. Any!? If ever so, as you can easily imagine, happens-before relation couldn't be an order any more. Would have loops. If ever doubtful, see the example code below. I imagine that the correct statement would be "an interruption happens before the SUBSEQUENT (
</div>
</div>
<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />
<div class="form-group">
<label for="system_os_info" class="col-sm-2 control-label">System
/ OS / Java Runtime Information </label>
<div class="col-sm-8">

<textarea id="system_os_info" name="system_os_info" style="resize: none;" placeholder="Additional system configuration information here." class="form-control" rows="4">



---------- BEGIN SOURCE ----------
//thread0 can do whatever. just keep living.
Thread thread0 = new Thread(()->{while(true);});
thread0.setDaemon(true);
thread0.start();

//interruption[A]
thread0.interrupt();

//no doubt I can observe thread0's interrupted state.
if (thread0.isInterrupted()) {
//the printing.
System.out.println("""
after reading JLS 17.4.4 carefully, we cannot avoid the stupid conclusion
that interruption[B] (coded below) happens-before this printing action.
""");
}

//thread1 starts.
new Thread(()->{
//interruption[B], which obviously is happened-before by the printing.
thread0.interrupt();
}).start();
---------- END SOURCE ----------