Querstion about ForkJoinPool / SecurityManager interoperability

[Doug Lea]

On 12/13/18 8:44 AM, Patrick Reinhart wrote:
> 
> This special case could have been handled also by the
> InnocuousForkJoinWorkerThread
> could in my opinion be relaxed to accept null or the system classloader
> to be set
> using setContextClassLoader() 

Thanks. We should/will do this. The unconditional throw was clearly too
strong; innocuous calls can be allowed. This doesn't address the general
issues of dynamic security manager installation, but at least removes an
obstacle for people trying to cope.

I created CR: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8215359

-Doug