[8u] TLSv1.3 RFR: 8245653: Remove 8u TLS tests

[Alexey Bakhtin]

Hi Martin,

Thank you for detailed review.
Updated patch at : http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~abakhtin/tls1.3/8245466/8245653/webrev.v4/

Regards
Alexey

> On 10 Aug 2020, at 23:52, Martin Balao <mbalao at redhat.com> wrote:
> 
> On 8/10/20 5:19 PM, Alexey Bakhtin wrote:
>> OK.
>> Webrev renamed to webrev.03 :
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~abakhtin/tls1.3/8245466/8245653/webrev.v3/
> 
> Thanks for that. Webrev.03 addresses all my comments so far but just
> realized there are a few more thing we may need to look at.
> 
> In particular, I checked what tests were modified by the original TLS
> 1.3 patch (8196584) and created a diff list of those not under the
> categories covered here so far:
> 
> * test/jdk/ProblemList.txt (modified)
>  * do we need to black-list those in JDK-8?
Agree. It should be updated but not at this step.

> * test/jdk/com/sun/jndi/ldap/DeadSSLLdapTimeoutTest.java (modified)
>  * I suggest including this change.
OK. Make sense. Removed in this step
> * test/jdk/java/net/httpclient/MockServer.java (modified)
>  * Not strictly necessary.
> * test/jdk/sun/security/ec/TestEC.java (modified)
>  * Do we need this change?
OK. Update of this test is included into the next step, but it would be better to remove it and add in the next step. Removed
> * test/jdk/sun/security/pkcs11/KeyStore/ClientAuth.java (modified)
>  * Do we need this change?
> * test/jdk/sun/security/pkcs11/KeyStore/ClientAuth.sh (modified)
>  * Do we need this change?
Agree. Tests removed
> * test/jdk/sun/security/tools/keytool/PrintSSL.java (modified)
>  * Looks like nice to have.
Agree. Test removed
> If you agree, we can handle this in a separated step. Also, in Step 11 I
> expect nothing but new files from JDK 11.0.7 without any changes. If you
> need modifications on top of these files, please include them on a
> separated step -so it's much easier for me to review-.
> 
I think we can handle it in this step and add new version of the tests in Step 11

> Let me know what you think.
> 
> Thanks,
> Martin.-
>