RFR 8080911: sun/security/krb5/auto/UseCacheAndStoreKey.java timed out intermittently

[Weijun Wang]

On 5/26/2015 7:59 AM, Xuelei Fan wrote:
> synchronized on class looks a little bit unsafe to me.

Why? Isn't it the same as making a static method synchronized? [1]

> As singleton is
> a static variable, creating the instance during initialization looks safer.
>
> -   private static Config singleton = null;
> +   private static Config singleton = new Config();

This line might throw an exception. Also, do you intend to make 
getInstance() simply returning singleton? This means if the first call 
to new Config() throws an exception, getInstance() will not try to 
reconstruct it. This might not be common in production, but I don't want 
to make any behavior change.

--Max

[1] https://docs.oracle.com/javase/specs/jls/se7/html/jls-8.html#jls-8.4.3.6

>
> Xuelei
>
> On 5/25/2015 10:16 PM, Weijun Wang wrote:
>> Hi All
>>
>> Please review a code change at
>>
>>    http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~weijun/8080911/webrev.00/
>>
>> I've limit the synchronized block to Config creation only and therefore
>> won't deadlock with EType's class initialization.
>>
>> Noreg-hard. The EType call is at class initialization and only run once
>> in a VM session, which is extremely difficult to catch.
>>
>> Thanks
>> Max
>