RFR JDK-7092821 "java.security.Provider.getService() is synchronized and became scalability bottleneck"

[Weijun Wang]

> On Dec 7, 2018, at 10:52 AM, Valerie Peng <valerie.peng at oracle.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi, Max,
> 
> In  my first prototype, I got rid of the Entries classes (for both SUN and SunRsaSign provider) and adds the Services inside the Provider. Later, when I saw VerificationProvider class and its dependency on the Entries class, I have to revert back to the original approach of having the Entries classes. I thought about putting the Entries classes into their provider classes, however, I am not sure if any of our licensee may remove SUN, SunRsaSign provider class which is why we have VerificationProvider. So, I think having separate Entries classes are probably the safest choice. As for creating a HashSet to store the services and then putting them into provider object in individual provider class is to work with the current API of Provider.putService()...
> 
> If you have better suggestion, I am all ears...

No. See below.

> 
> Thanks!
> Valerie
> 
> 
> On 12/3/2018 7:57 PM, Weijun Wang wrote:
>> In fact, if the only reason why those Entries classes exist is because of VerificationProvider, can we move the content back into their Provider class as a public static method which is still callable by VerificationProvider?

I wrote this on my cellphone when I'm out, but when I come back and want to try it out, I cannot use Provider as the argument for the proposed static method.

So, just keep the current change.

Thanks,
Max

>> 
>> —Max
>> 
>>> 在 2018年12月4日，11:43，Weijun Wang <weijun.wang at oracle.com> 写道：
>>> 
>>> Hi Valerie
>>> 
>>> I'm looking at the put->putService changes. Before this, a single put() in SunRsaSignEntries call adds a service but now you need to add() into a LinkedHashSet first in SunRsaSignEntries and then putService() each back in SunRsaSign.
>>> 
>>> I don't have a simple way to do this since Provider::putService is protected and SunRsaSignEntries is also used in VerificationProvider, just wonder if you have thought about this.
>>> 
>>> Thanks
>>> Max
>>> 
>>>> On Nov 22, 2018, at 2:05 AM, Valerie Peng <valerie.peng at oracle.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Hi,
>>>> 
>>>> Can someone help reviewing this fix?
>>>> 
>>>> Besides changing the Provider class to use ConcurrentHashMap in order to reduce the lock contention on Provider.getService() calls, I also changed the security providers in java.base module to register through putService(...) calls. Performance is manually verified and mach5 run is clean.
>>>> 
>>>> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-7092821
>>>> Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~valeriep/7092821/webrev.00/
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Valerie