RFR: 8249825: Tests sun/security/ssl/SSLSocketImpl/SetClientMode.java and NonAutoClose.java marked with @ignore [v2]

Artur Barashev abarashev at openjdk.org
Tue Mar 18 02:24:11 UTC 2025


On Thu, 6 Mar 2025 12:28:19 GMT, Fernando Guallini <fguallini at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> The following tests are marked with @ignore (not running):
>> 
>> - sun/security/ssl/SSLSocketImpl/SetClientMode.java: it checks that setting the clientMode after the handshake has begun is not permitted, but this was failing intermittently due to a race condition, it was possible that SetClientMode was called before the client socket was updated with handshake isNegotiated = true. The fix is to introduce a latch to sync between client and main threads. Included additional refactoring to ensure test stability.
>> 
>> - sun/security/ssl/SSLSocketImpl/NonAutoClose.java: This test should only run in TLS <= 1.2, as TLSv1.3 changes the behaviour of close_notify. Included additional refactoring to ensure test stability.
>> 
>> Executed both tests 10K times, no test flakiness found
>
> Fernando Guallini has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
> 
>   SSLContextTemplate and using asserts

test/jdk/sun/security/ssl/SSLSocketImpl/NonAutoClose.java line 135:

> 133:          */
> 134:         System.out.println("Waiting for server ready");
> 135:         if (!SERVER_READY.await(5, TimeUnit.SECONDS)) {

Please see my other comment about `await()`.

test/jdk/sun/security/ssl/SSLSocketImpl/SetClientMode.java line 100:

> 98:                 connectedSocket.getSession();
> 99: 
> 100:                 if (!HANDSHAKE_COMPLETE.await(5, TimeUnit.SECONDS)) {

The test will be more robust if we do a simple `await()` call here. On some busy systems even 5 seconds may not be enough. JTEG tests have a default timeout of 2 minutes, so it won't wait forever in any case.

-------------

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/23898#discussion_r2000018849
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/23898#discussion_r2000014224


More information about the security-dev mailing list