RFR [8024521] (process) Async close issues with Process InputStream

[Ivan Gerasimov]

On 18.10.2013 10:13, Martin Buchholz wrote:
> The latest webrev is missing the test case that was present in earlier 
> revisions.
>
Yes, I removed it from the webrev, following the suggestion posted earlier.
I'm going to replace it with an instruction for QA about how to verify 
the fix.

However, I have tested the latest change with this test with JPRT build 
system on available platforms.
All ran well.

Sincerely yours,
Ivan

>
> On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 12:13 PM, Ivan Gerasimov 
> <ivan.gerasimov at oracle.com <mailto:ivan.gerasimov at oracle.com>> wrote:
>
>     Thank you Alan!
>
>     Yes, I missed that fact that reading from the recycled file
>     descriptor is actually a  problem by itself.
>
>     Would you please take a look at another updated webrev?
>
>     It contains another implementation suggested by Paul Sandoz with
>     some minor changes.
>
>     http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~igerasim/8024521/2/webrev/
>     <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Eigerasim/8024521/2/webrev/>
>     <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Eigerasim/8024521/2/webrev/>
>
>     Here we synchronize close() with calls to available() and read()
>     and check for asynchronous close() that could have happened in
>     between.
>
>     Sincerely yours,
>     Ivan
>
>
>
>     On 17.10.2013 16:34, Alan Bateman wrote:
>
>         On 15/10/2013 16:31, Ivan Gerasimov wrote:
>
>             Here's the updated webrev with the solution by Paul:
>             http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~igerasim/8024521/1/webrev/
>             <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Eigerasim/8024521/1/webrev/>
>
>             I've also excluded the test from it.
>             Instead, I'm going to write a manual testing instruction
>             for SQE.
>
>             I've tested the fix and it works as expected.
>
>         I've looked at the updated webrev but there still appears to
>         be an issue if the application closes the stream at just
>         around the time that the process exits. So I think you will
>         need to go back to a solution along the lines of the first
>         patch so there is coordination between the process exit and
>         the close.
>
>         -Alan.
>
>
>
>