RFR(s): (new approach) 8223777: In posix_spawn mode, failing to exec() jspawnhelper does not result in an error

[Thomas Stüfe]

No problems in tier 1 tests (jdk-submit).

..Thomas

On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 8:16 AM Thomas Stüfe <thomas.stuefe at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Ping...
>
> Guys, I need some feedback on this. If we do not fix this issue, we may
> want to roll back the use of posix_spawn() as a default and return to vfork
> for JDK13.
>
> The fix has been tested in our nightlies for two nights in a row and did
> not show any errors.
>
> Cheers, Thomas
>
>
> On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 4:15 PM Thomas Stüfe <thomas.stuefe at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> (old mail thread:
>> https://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2019-May/060139.html
>> )
>>
>> May I please have your reviews and opinions for the following bug fix:
>>
>> issue: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8223777
>> cr:
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~stuefe/webrevs/8223777-posix_spawn-no-exec-error-alternate-impl/webrev.00/webrev/
>>
>> ---
>>
>> The fix implements Florians proposal: the jspawnhelper will signal its
>> aliveness to the parent process the moment it gains control. If the parent
>> process does not get the signal, it assumes exec'ing the jspawnhelper never
>> worked.
>>
>> I only do this for posix_spawn mode, out of cautiousness.
>>
>> (Note that I kept the fix as minimal as possible. I found a minor bug and
>> some improvement possibilities and opened follow up issues to track them:
>> JDK-8224180 and JDK-8224181).
>>
>> Thanks, Thomas
>>
>>
>>