RFR(s): 8212828: (process) Change the Process launch mechanism default on Linux to be posix_spawn

[Thomas Stüfe]

Hi all,

second version, including the updated comment in ProcessImpl.c Martin
requested:

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~stuefe/webrevs/8213192--(process)-change-the-process-launch-mechanism-default-on-linux-to-be-posix_spawn/webrev.01/webrev/index.html

@Roger: thanks for feeding this into your tests. I still try to get it to
run thru jdk-submit, but that seems to be stuck again..

Cheers, Thomas





On Wed, Feb 6, 2019 at 10:29 AM Thomas Stüfe <thomas.stuefe at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi all
>
> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8213192
> webrev:
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~stuefe/webrevs/8213192--(process)-change-the-process-launch-mechanism-default-on-linux-to-be-posix_spawn/webrev.00/webrev/index.html
>
> (@Roger: I hope you do not mind? The bug is assigned to you but since I
> happened to play around with posix_spawn I prepared this webrev. If you
> rather do this change, that is fine and I will leave it to you.)
>
> When we added the possibility to use posix_spawn as underlying
> implementation for Runtime.exec() on Linux with
> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8212828, we agreed to keep VFORK
> as default until work on 13 starts. So now would be a good time to switch
> the default to posix_spawn to get a good testing window. Note that at SAP
> we run our VMs internally with posix_spawn as default since some months and
> have not seen problems.
>
> As for the fix, I added a test which tests that the default is indeed
> posix_spawn - not sure whether this is overdoing it though. Also, I use
> strace for the test, and /bin/true, and while strace is usually available
> and reachable by path resolution, I am afraid on some test machines it may
> not. What do you think, should I leave the test out?
>
> The fix ran through all java/lang/ProcessBuilder jtreg tests ok.
>
> Thanks, Thomas
>
>