Code Review Request 6203816 and 6720456

[Valerie (Yu-Ching) Peng]

Great, thanks for the confirmation...
Valerie

On 11/19/10 16:45, Weijun Wang wrote:
> I'm fine with all code changes.
>
> Thanks
> Max
>
>
> On 11/20/2010 08:00 AM, Valerie (Yu-Ching) Peng wrote:
>> On 11/17/10 19:31, Weijun Wang wrote:
>>>
>>> On 11/18/2010 11:00 AM, Valerie (Yu-Ching) Peng wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for the lightning fast review!
>>>> TBD means "to be determined at runtime". Different machines w/ 
>>>> different
>>>> versions of Solaris may support different key sizes. So, I use TBD to
>>>> indicate the key sizes which may only be supported by the newer 
>>>> versions
>>>> of Solairs release.
>>>
>>> I see. So for a test failure (i.e. expected != actual) on those TBD
>>> tests, there is no way to find out whether it's because the key size
>>> is not supported or some other real keypair generation error?
>> For the TBD tests, we sort of just let them run, i.e. through the
>> getInstance(), init(..), generateKey(), and don't enforce the actual
>> result to match the expected result.
>> Our current java API doesn't have the capability to query the provider
>> supported key ranges, so there isn't an easy way to find out at runtime.
>> Enhancing the test framework for this is possible but I doubt we'll get
>> to it given our resource constraints. So, I just handle it this way
>> using the TBD value.
>>
>> If you have some more comments, let me know. Otherwise, I'll be putting
>> them back shortly...and I'll file another CR to address what other
>> concerns that you have...
>> Thanks!
>> Valerie
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> I thought you are on vacation? If not, there are some new PKCS11 test
>>>> failures which seems related to your resource string changes. I'll 
>>>> take
>>>> a shot at them if you are on vacation...
>>>
>>> Yes I am on vacation, but staying at home. I've written a mail to Lana
>>> on the PKCS11 test failures. It seems they haven't used the new
>>> sunpkcs11.jar, maybe their jdk/make/closed is still not updated.
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> Max
>>>
>>>> Valerie
>>>>
>>>> On 11/17/10 17:00, Weijun Wang wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On 11/18/2010 07:31 AM, Valerie (Yu-Ching) Peng wrote:
>>>>>> Hi, Max,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Can you please help reviewing the following two regression test 
>>>>>> fixes?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 6203816: Can not run
>>>>>> test/java/security/Security/ClassLoaderDeadlock.sh
>>>>>> from the command line
>>>>>> Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~valeriep/6203816/webrev.00/
>>>>>
>>>>> Fix looks fine.
>>>>>
>>>>>> I noticed that Deadlock2.sh would fail when the TESTJAVA env
>>>>>> variable is
>>>>>> set to a JDK instead of a JRE. So, I fixed it here as well.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 6720456: New 4150 may have larger blowfish keysizes
>>>>>> Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~valeriep/6720456/webrev.00/
>>>>>
>>>>> Haven't looked into the base class PKCS11Test yet, so "TBD" means you
>>>>> don't care if it succeed or fails? I guess if a bitsize is not
>>>>> supported, the exception should be different and you can detect it 
>>>>> and
>>>>> mark PASS?
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks
>>>>> Max
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> Valerie
>>>>
>>