RFR: JDK-8227021: VM fails if any sun.boot.library.path paths are longer than JVM_MAXPATHLEN

David Holmes david.holmes at oracle.com
Thu Aug 15 11:55:59 UTC 2019


On 15/08/2019 9:40 pm, Adam Farley8 wrote:
> Hi Daniel,
> 
> Seems reasonable.
> 
> Will put together a jtreg shell script.

shell script tests are not desirable. ProcessTools should be usable to 
set up a bad command-line and check for the right response.

David

> Best Regards
> 
> Adam Farley
> IBM Runtimes
> 
> 
> David Holmes <david.holmes at oracle.com> wrote on 15/08/2019 10:42:35:
> 
>> From: David Holmes <david.holmes at oracle.com>
>> To: "serguei.spitsyn at oracle.com"  <serguei.spitsyn at oracle.com>, Adam
>> Farley8 <adam.farley at uk.ibm.com>
>> Cc: daniel.daugherty at oracle.com,  hotspot-dev at openjdk.java.net
>> Date: 15/08/2019 10:42
>> Subject: Re: RFR: JDK-8227021:  VM fails if any sun.boot.library.path
>> paths are longer than JVM_MAXPATHLEN
>> 
>> Hi Serguei,
>> 
>> On 15/08/2019 6:18 pm, serguei.spitsyn at oracle.com wrote:
>> > Thank you, Adam!
>> > 
>> > David, what do you thin about this testing coverage?
>> > Is it enough for this fix?
>> 
>> I don't see any real testing of sun.boot.library.path in our tests  only:
>> 
>> ./hotspot/jtreg/runtime/6819213/TestBootNativeLibraryPath.java
>> ./hotspot/jtreg/runtime/jni/FindClass/FindClassFromBoot.java
>> 
>> seem to refer to it but the former is restricted to 32-bit systems  only!
>> So this seems to be an area devoid of any real test code outside of
>> 32-bit. I don't understand why that is the case. So if there's no
>> regression test then there's no real testing of this code at all.  That
>> said it seems unfair to force Adam to define tests for code that is
>> effectively untested. It would be reasonable for him to extend existing
>> tests to cover the long path problem, if they existed.
>> 
>> But a basic regression test should at least be created IMO.
>> 
>> David
>> -----
>> 
>> > Thanks,
>> > Serguei
>> > 
>> > 
>> > On 8/14/19 04:09, Adam Farley8 wrote:
>> >> Addendum: I've run the test/hotspot/jtreg/runtime tests against  a
>> >> patched and unpatched build on linux x86 64bit, and the pass/fail  rate
>> >> is identical.
>> >>
>> >> 630 passed, 7 failed, and 63 error in both cases.
>> >>
>> >> Best Regards
>> >>
>> >> Adam Farley
>> >> IBM Runtimes
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Adam Farley8/UK/IBM wrote on 13/08/2019 17:36:44:
>> >>
>> >> > From: Adam Farley8/UK/IBM
>> >> > To: "serguei.spitsyn at oracle.com" <serguei.spitsyn at oracle.com>,
>> >> > daniel.daugherty at oracle.com
>> >> > Cc: David Holmes <david.holmes at oracle.com>, hotspot-dev at openjdk.java.net
>> >> > Date: 13/08/2019 17:36
>> >> > Subject: Re: RFR: JDK-8227021: VM fails if any sun.boot.library.path
>> >> > paths are longer than JVM_MAXPATHLEN
>> >> > 
>> >> > Hi Serguei, Daniel,
>> >> > 
>> >> > I ran the bug specific test mentioned in the bug, as  well as this:
>> >> > test/hotspot/jtreg/sanity
>> >> > 
>> >> > No failures. Well, except for the one we wanted in the  bug test. :)
>> >> > 
>> >> > On reflection, this seems thin, so I'm running some  more hotspot
>> >> tests now.
>> >> > 
>> >> > Advice welcome.
>> >> > 
>> >> > Best Regards
>> >> >
>> >> > Adam Farley
>> >> > IBM Runtimes
>> >>
>> >> > 
>> >> > "serguei.spitsyn at oracle.com" <serguei.spitsyn at oracle.com>  wrote on
>> >> > 13/08/2019 17:09:17:
>> >> >
>> >> > > From: "serguei.spitsyn at oracle.com" <serguei.spitsyn at oracle.com>
>> >> > > To: Adam Farley8 <adam.farley at uk.ibm.com>,  David Holmes
>> >> > > <david.holmes at oracle.com>
>> >> > > Cc: hotspot-dev at openjdk.java.net
>> >> > > Date: 13/08/2019 17:20
>> >> > > Subject: Re: RFR: JDK-8227021: VM fails if any  sun.boot.library.path
>> >> > > paths are longer than JVM_MAXPATHLEN
>> >> > > 
>> >> > > Hi Adam,
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Could you, please, tell a little bit on how did  you test the fix?
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Thanks,
>> >> > > Serguei
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > > On 8/13/19 09:00, serguei.spitsyn at oracle.com wrote:
>> >> > > Hi Adam,
>> >> > >
>> >> > > I'll sponsor the push.
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Thanks,
>> >> > > Serguei
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > > On 8/13/19 08:48, Adam Farley8 wrote:
>> >> > > Hi David, 
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Since we have two positive reviews (yours and Serguei's),  could you
>> >> > > sponsor the change please?
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Best Regards
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Adam Farley
>> >> > > IBM Runtimes
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > > David Holmes <david.holmes at oracle.com> wrote  on 12/08/2019 23:32:14:
>> >> > >
>> >> > > > From: David Holmes <david.holmes at oracle.com>
>> >> > > > To: Adam Farley8 <adam.farley at uk.ibm.com>
>> >> > > > Cc: hotspot-dev at openjdk.java.net, "serguei.spitsyn at oracle.com"
>> >> > > > <serguei.spitsyn at oracle.com>
>> >> > > > Date: 12/08/2019 23:32
>> >> > > > Subject: Re: RFR: JDK-8227021: VM fails if  any sun.boot.library.path
>> >> > > > paths are longer than JVM_MAXPATHLEN
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > Looks fine.
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > Thanks,
>> >> > > > David
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > On 13/08/2019 1:19 am, Adam Farley8 wrote:
>> >> > > > > Hi David,
>> >> > > > >
>> >> > > > > Changes made as requested:
>> >> > > > > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?
>> >> > > > u=http-3A__cr.openjdk.java.net_-7Eafarley_8227021.4_webrev&d=DwID-
>> >> > > > g&c=jf_iaSHvJObTbx-siA1ZOg&r=P5m8KWUXJf-
>> >> > > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > 
>> >> 
>> CeVJc0hDGD9AQ2LkcXDC0PMV9ntVw5Ho&m=mZM8IR4e_zmrfcsF3XJjoGEMrZb4WtEL7Y6Ugd6Naqg&s=sZ2UKqqUIq0El-
>> >> > > > RsqYz6jmTh4Q2UghwdrQX6of8Lw0E&e=
>> >> > > > >
>> >> > > > > Best Regards
>> >> > > > >
>> >> > > > > Adam Farley
>> >> > > > > IBM Runtimes
>> >> > > > >
>> >> > > > >
>> >> > > > > David Holmes <david.holmes at oracle.com>  wrote on 12/08/2019
>> >> 04:55:36:
>> >> > > > >
>> >> > > > >> From: David Holmes <david.holmes at oracle.com>
>> >> > > > >> To: Adam Farley8 <adam.farley at uk.ibm.com>,
>> >> > > > >> "serguei.spitsyn at oracle.com"  <serguei.spitsyn at oracle.com>
>> >> > > > >> Cc: hotspot-dev at openjdk.java.net
>> >> > > > >> Date: 12/08/2019 04:56
>> >> > > > >> Subject: Re: RFR: JDK-8227021:  VM  fails if any
>> >> sun.boot.library.path
>> >> > > > >> paths are longer than JVM_MAXPATHLEN
>> >> > > > >>
>> >> > > > >> Hi Adam,
>> >> > > > >>
>> >> > > > >> On 10/08/2019 2:47 am, Adam Farley8  wrote:
>> >> > > > >> > Hi Serguei, David,
>> >> > > > >> >
>> >> > > > >> > My turn to apologise for the  delay. :)
>> >> > > > >> >
>> >> > > > >> > I've modified the code as per  Serguei's request. Take a look
>> >> > >  and let me
>> >> > > > >> > know if this is the sort of  thing you were thinking of.
>> >> > > > >> >
>> >> > > > >> > Webrev: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?
>> >> > > > >> 
>> >> u=http-3A__cr.openjdk.java.net_-7Eafarley_8227021.3_webrev_&d=DwID-
>> >> > > > >> g&c=jf_iaSHvJObTbx-siA1ZOg&r=P5m8KWUXJf-
>> >> > > > >> CeVJc0hDGD9AQ2LkcXDC0PMV9ntVw5Ho&m=8Wa8Zdfmvn-
>> >> > > > >>
>> >> > > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > 
>> >> 
>> yvzvCAhOyJ_etFblRA4vmLGbKF4aW8PY&s=L19aeFXoR9JIO62QRPFzZObIU8RbhpCtXSvUibD2ISk&e=
>> >> > > > >>
>> >> > > > >> I'd prefer to see the helper just  as a file static function
>> >> > rather  than
>> >> > > > >> adding it to the os class.
>> >> > > > >>
>> >> > > > >> +  * supplied array of arrays  of chars (a), where n
>> >> > > > >>
>> >> > > > >> I assume (a) is meant to refer to  the parameter, but you
>> >> > actually  called
>> >> > > > >> it arrayarray. I think "a"  or "arr" would suffice.
>> >> > > > >>
>> >> > > > >> Thanks,
>> >> > > > >> David
>> >> > > > >>
>> >> > > > >> > Best Regards
>> >> > > > >> >
>> >> > > > >> > Adam Farley
>> >> > > > >> > IBM Runtimes
>> >> > > > >> >
>> >> > > > >> >
>> >> > > > >> > "serguei.spitsyn at oracle.com"  <serguei.spitsyn at oracle.com>
>> >>  wrote on
>> >> > > > >> > 31/07/2019 17:18:05:
>> >> > > > >> >
>> >> > > > >> >> From: "serguei.spitsyn at oracle.com"
>> >> <serguei.spitsyn at oracle.com>
>> >> > > > >> >> To: Adam Farley8 <adam.farley at uk.ibm.com>,   David  Holmes
>> >> > > > >> >> <david.holmes at oracle.com>
>> >> > > > >> >> Cc: serviceability-dev <serviceability-dev at openjdk.java.net>,
>> >> > > > >> >> hotspot-dev at openjdk.java.net
>> >> > > > >> >> Date: 31/07/2019 17:18
>> >> > > > >> >> Subject: Re: RFR: JDK-8227021:   VM fails if any
>> >> > sun.boot.library.path
>> >> > > > >> >> paths are longer than JVM_MAXPATHLEN
>> >> > > > >> >>
>> >> > > > >> >> Hi Adam,
>> >> > > > >> >>
>> >> > > > >> >> It looks Okay to me.
>> >> > > > >> >>
>> >> > > > >> >> A couple of minor comments.
>> >> > > > >> >>
>> >> > > > >> >> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?
>> >> > > > >> u=http-3A__cr.openjdk.java.net_-7Eafarley_8227021.
>> >> > > > >> 2_webrev_src_hotspot_&d=DwID-g&c=jf_iaSHvJObTbx-
>> >> > > > >> 
>> >> siA1ZOg&r=P5m8KWUXJf-CeVJc0hDGD9AQ2LkcXDC0PMV9ntVw5Ho&m=8Wa8Zdfmvn-
>> >> > > > >>
>> >> > > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > 
>> >> 
>> yvzvCAhOyJ_etFblRA4vmLGbKF4aW8PY&s=NL6tYuwwDod3DSmj-1ztxAywpO8L52HEyO0wvTR05bs&e=
>> >> > > > >> >> share/runtime/os.cpp.frames.html
>> >> > > > >> >
>> >> > > > >> >> 1362      //release  allocated storage  before exiting the vm
>> >> > > > >> >> 1363      while (i > 0) {
>> >> > > > >> >> 1364 i--;
>> >> > > > >> >> 1365 if (opath[i] != NULL)   {
>> >> > > > >> >> 1366   FREE_C_HEAP_ARRAY(char,    opath[i]);
>> >> > > > >> >> 1367 }
>> >> > > > >> >> 1368      }
>> >> > > > >> >> 1369 FREE_C_HEAP_ARRAY(char*,  opath);
>> >> > > > >> >>
>> >> > > > >> >> 1377      //release allocated storage before  returning  null
>> >> > > > >> >> 1378      while (i > 0) {
>> >> > > > >> >> 1379 i--;
>> >> > > > >> >> 1380 if (opath[i] != NULL)   {
>> >> > > > >> >> 1381   FREE_C_HEAP_ARRAY(char,    opath[i]);
>> >> > > > >> >> 1382 }
>> >> > > > >> >> 1383      }
>> >> > > > >> >> 1384 FREE_C_HEAP_ARRAY(char*,  opath);
>> >> > > > >> >>
>> >> > > > >> >> This duplicated fragments  is worth to refactor to a function.
>> >> > > > >> >> Also a space is missed at  the beginning of the comment.
>> >> > > > >> >>
>> >> > > > >> >>
>> >> > > > >> >> Thanks,
>> >> > > > >> >> Serguei
>> >> > > > >> >>
>> >> > > > >> >>
>> >> > > > >> >>
>> >> > > > >> >> On 7/31/19 02:01, Adam Farley8  wrote:
>> >> > > > >> >> Hi All,
>> >> > > > >> >>
>> >> > > > >> >> Reviewers requested for  the change below.
>> >> > > > >> >>
>> >> > > > >> >> @David - Agreed. Would you  be prepared to sponsor the change?
>> >> > > > >> >>
>> >> > > > >> >> Bug: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?
>> >> > > > >> u=https-3A__bugs.openjdk.java.net_browse_JDK-2D8227021&d=DwID-
>> >> > > > >> g&c=jf_iaSHvJObTbx-siA1ZOg&r=P5m8KWUXJf-
>> >> > > > >> CeVJc0hDGD9AQ2LkcXDC0PMV9ntVw5Ho&m=8Wa8Zdfmvn-
>> >> > > > >>
>> >> > > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > 
>> >> 
>> yvzvCAhOyJ_etFblRA4vmLGbKF4aW8PY&s=xykJ0KLy9AKWO8zmC0amfR7xxUsvyKEjlf3y7WWOqvE&e=
>> >> > > > >> >> Webrev: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?
>> >> > > > >> 
>> >> u=http-3A__cr.openjdk.java.net_-7Eafarley_8227021.2_webrev_&d=DwID-
>> >> > > > >> g&c=jf_iaSHvJObTbx-siA1ZOg&r=P5m8KWUXJf-
>> >> > > > >> CeVJc0hDGD9AQ2LkcXDC0PMV9ntVw5Ho&m=8Wa8Zdfmvn-
>> >> > > > >>
>> >> > > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > 
>> >> 
>> yvzvCAhOyJ_etFblRA4vmLGbKF4aW8PY&s=NvIza4VVWG3CiDhmQVmXsghH_4h_c5mFJbHwkCUcut0&e=
>> >> > > > >> >>
>> >> > > > >> >> Best Regards
>> >> > > > >> >>
>> >> > > > >> >> Adam Farley
>> >> > > > >> >> IBM Runtimes
>> >> > > > >> >>
>> >> > > > >> >> P.S. Remembered to add the  links this time. :)
>> >> > > > >> >>
>> >> > > > >> >>
>> >> > > > >> >> David Holmes <david.holmes at oracle.com>  wrote on
>> >> 30/07/2019 03:37:53:
>> >> > > > >> >>
>> >> > > > >> >> > From: David Holmes  <david.holmes at oracle.com>
>> >> > > > >> >> > To: Adam Farley8 <adam.farley at uk.ibm.com>
>> >> > > > >> >> > Cc: hotspot-dev at openjdk.java.net,  serviceability-dev
>> >> > > > >> >> > <serviceability-dev at openjdk.java.net>
>> >> > > > >> >> > Date: 30/07/2019 03:38
>> >> > > > >> >> > Subject: Re: RFR: JDK-8227021:  VM fails if any
>> >> > sun.boot.library.path
>> >> > > > >> >> > paths are longer than  JVM_MAXPATHLEN
>> >> > > > >> >> >
>> >> > > > >> >> > Hi Adam,
>> >> > > > >> >> >
>> >> > > > >> >> > On 25/07/2019 3:57  am, Adam Farley8 wrote:
>> >> > > > >> >> > > Hi David,
>> >> > > > >> >> > >
>> >> > > > >> >> > > Welcome back.  :)
>> >> > > > >> >> >
>> >> > > > >> >> > Thanks. Sorry for the  delay in getting back to this.
>> >> > > > >> >> >
>> >> > > > >> >> > I like .v2 as it is  much simpler (notwithstanding freeing
>> >> > > > the  already
>> >> > > > >> >> > allocated arrays adds  some complexity - thanks for
>> >> fixing  that).
>> >> > > > >> >> >
>> >> > > > >> >> > I'm still not sure  we can't optimise things better for
>> >> >  unchangeable
>> >> > > > >> >> > properties like the  boot libary path, but that's another
>> >>  RFE.
>> >> > > > >> >> >
>> >> > > > >> >> > Thanks,
>> >> > > > >> >> > David
>> >> > > > >> >> >
>> >> > > > >> >> Unless stated otherwise  above:
>> >> > > > >> >> IBM United Kingdom Limited  - Registered in England and
>> >> Wales  with
>> >> > > > >> >> number 741598.
>> >> > > > >> >> Registered office: PO Box  41, North Harbour, Portsmouth,
>> >> > > > Hampshire  PO6 3AU
>> >> > > > >> > Unless stated otherwise above:
>> >> > > > >> > IBM United Kingdom Limited -  Registered in England and Wales
>> >> > >  with number
>> >> > > > >> > 741598.
>> >> > > > >> > Registered office: PO Box 41,  North Harbour, Portsmouth,
>> >> > > > Hampshire  PO6 3AU
>> >> > > > >>
>> >> > > > >
>> >> > > > > Unless stated otherwise above:
>> >> > > > > IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered  in England and Wales
>> >> > with number
>> >> > > > > 741598.
>> >> > > > > Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour,  Portsmouth,
>> >> > Hampshire PO6 3AU
>> >> > > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Unless stated otherwise above:
>> >> > > IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England  and Wales with
>> >> > > number 741598.
>> >> > > Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth,  Hampshire
>> >> PO6 3AU
>> >> > Unless stated otherwise above:
>> >> > IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and  Wales with
>> >> > number 741598.
>> >> > Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth,  Hampshire
>> >> PO6 3AU
>> >>
>> >> Unless stated otherwise above:
>> >> IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales  with
>> >> number 741598.
>> >> Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth,  Hampshire PO6 3AU
>> > 
>> 
> 
> Unless stated otherwise above:
> IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 
> 741598.
> Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU


More information about the hotspot-dev mailing list