Thoughts on possible options to JDK-8027598

[Rajan Halade]

On 11/22/2013 11:42, Sean Mullan wrote:
> On 11/21/2013 04:53 AM, Chris Hegarty wrote:
>>>>> If I am correct, JTREG has support provider cleanup already. But the
>>>>> question is even JTREG reset the providers, it still cannot ensure 
>>>>> next
>>>>> test won't be impacted because in some circumstances JDK may need to
>>>>> cache something which depends on previous providers. Still need to
>>>>> analysis the test case by case.
>>>>
>>>> Right, any static or cached data may be invalid, and this will require
>>>> careful changes to the JRE itself.
>>> Pardon my ignorance - if I gather correctly then ProvidersSnapshot
>>> library also doesn't sandbox effects completely.
>>
>> FYI. I am not part of the security team, and someone from the security
>> group should ultimately have to agree/disagree, but we have similar
>> issues in other parts of the platform. I don't know the specifics of the
>> code here so it may, or may not, be an issue.
>>
>> If any part of the security framework stores values in static fields,
>> that is dependent on the security providers, then when the providers
>> change this static value may be incorrect.
>>
>> We encounter this from time to time with system properties. E.g. JDK
>> HTTP Client code reads system property and stores in static field, JDK
>> HTTP Client will never never re-read the property as it believes it will
>> not change. Having jtreg reset/clean certain system properties will not
>> help in this case.
>
> Yes, the example with system properties is a good one.
>
> However, providers are designed to be added and removed dynamically 
> (see the java.security.Security API), so if there is some static 
> information not being cleared when providers are reset, I would tend 
> to think it may be a bug in the JDK.
yes. thanks!
>
> My preference would be change jtreg to clear/restore providers, and 
> more thoroughly analyze any subsequent test failures as it may be a 
> bug in the JDK.
Ok, I will follow up with jtreg team to find out when they can commit to 
timeline.

- Rajan
>
> --Sean
>