[9] RFR: JDK-7052815 Change tests that remove or add providers to run in othervm mode

Sean Mullan sean.mullan at oracle.com
Fri Jul 8 15:34:04 UTC 2016


On 07/08/2016 11:23 AM, Wang Weijun wrote:
> Hi Tim
>
> Are we seeing new failures in these tests?
>
> I am asking this question because once upon a time (4 years ago) I
> was involved in several RFEs [1][2][3] to do some similar the same
> cleanup. Some tests were put into othervm mode, but for most others,
> we tried our best to make them runnable in samevm/agentvm mode for
> performance benefits. For example, in
> test/java/security/Provider/RemoveProvider.java, the main method has
>
> 39         ProvidersSnapshot snapshot = ProvidersSnapshot.create();
> 40         try { 41             main0(args); 42         } finally {
> 43             snapshot.restore(); 44         }
>
> The ProvidersSnapshot class is meant to be able to restore the
> provider list after the test completes, and thus not necessary to run
> in othervm.
>
> Also, I think there is no need to care about multiple tests running
> at the same time, because both samevm and agentvm modes make sure
> each VM is used in batch mode so no two tests can run simultaneously
> in the same VM. The agentvm mode does support concurrency but it's
> about multiple VMs running in parallel and each one will only serve
> one test at one time.

Good points. I think we should take a step back and decide if these 
changes are really necessary. The bug itself was filed in 2011, so maybe 
it is no longer an issue after Max' work which came after that.

--Sean

>
> Thanks Max
>
> [1] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-7054918 [2]
> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-7055362 [3]
> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-7055363 [4]
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~tidu/7052815/webrev.00/test/java/security/Provider/RemoveProvider.java.html
>
>
>> On Jul 8, 2016, at 9:37 AM, Tim Du <tiantian.du at oracle.com> wrote:
>>
>> Updated copyright , new webrev here:
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~tidu/7052815/webrev.02/ Please help to
>> review them ,Thanks.
>>
>> Regards Tim
>



More information about the security-dev mailing list