RFR: 8325567: jspawnhelper without args fails with segfault [v7]
Roger Riggs
rriggs at openjdk.org
Thu Mar 7 19:54:57 UTC 2024
On Thu, 7 Mar 2024 17:13:12 GMT, Elif Aslan <duke at openjdk.org> wrote:
>> This change is intended to address the segmentation fault issue that occurs when jspawnhelper is called without arguments,.
>> There is a new test added to verify the behavior in such cases.
>>
>> `[ec2-user at ip-172-16-0-10 jdk]$ make CONF=linux-x86_64-server-fastdebug test TEST=test/jdk/java/lang/ProcessBuilder/JspawnhelperWarnings.java`
>>
>>
>>
>> ==============================
>> Test summary
>> ==============================
>> TEST TOTAL PASS FAIL ERROR
>> jtreg:test/jdk/java/lang/ProcessBuilder/JspawnhelperWarnings.java
>> 1 1 0 0
>> ==============================
>> TEST SUCCESS
>
> Elif Aslan has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
>
> Add args[0] back
test/jdk/java/lang/ProcessBuilder/JspawnhelperWarnings.java line 29:
> 27: * @test
> 28: * @bug 8325567
> 29: * @requires (os.family == "linux") | (os.family == "aix")
Unless I'm mistaken, jspawn helper is used on Mac as well.
test/jdk/java/lang/ProcessBuilder/JspawnhelperWarnings.java line 36:
> 34: import java.nio.file.Paths;
> 35: import java.util.Arrays;
> 36: import java.util.concurrent.TimeUnit;
Unused import.
test/jdk/java/lang/ProcessBuilder/JspawnhelperWarnings.java line 56:
> 54: public static void main(String[] args) throws Exception {
> 55: for (int nArgs = 0; nArgs < 10; nArgs++) {
> 56: tryWithNArgs(nArgs);
Running with more than 3 arguments is unnecessary. Yes, its quick but just burns cpu.
When running with 2 arguments, the failure mode is not due to the number of arguments but is because argument 1 is formatted incorrectly; should be `"%d:%d:%d"`. Though I supposed this falls into the "incorrect use category".
-------------
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/18112#discussion_r1516736692
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/18112#discussion_r1516738195
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/18112#discussion_r1516733166
More information about the core-libs-dev
mailing list