RFR: 8361711: Add library name configurability to PKCS11Test.java [v2]

[Thomas Fitzsimmons]

On Fri, 29 Aug 2025 23:33:16 GMT, Thomas Fitzsimmons <duke at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Thank you for reviewing.
>> 
>>> Hmm, I find it somewhat obscure that the config variant property changes the value of the config file name.
>> 
>> Yes, I see your point.
>> 
>>> With this new config variant property, it assumes that the confg file name has a "." which is probably true most if not all times.
>> 
>> The regular expression supports appending to a file without a ".":
>> 
>> 
>> $ jshell -q
>> jshell> "kryoptic".replaceFirst("(\.[^\.]*)?$", "-" + "sensitive" + "$1");
>> $1 ==> "kryoptic-sensitive"
>> 
>> 
>> I should have added this case to the comment you mentioned above, will do in the expanded comment you requested.
>> 
>>> We should document all these properties so it's clear their precedence as well as the assumptions/implications. All these security can be set independently, right? It's a bit strange that you set the CUSTOM_P11_CONFIG NAME and then setting the config variant property would actually changes the config file to a different name.
>> 
>> Yes, conceptually I am treating file pairs like `p11-nss.txt` and `p11-nss-sensitive.txt` (and `p11-kryoptic.txt`, `p11-kryoptic-sensitive.txt`) as variants of the same configuration.  When `CUSTOM_P11_CONFIG_VARIANT` is set, `CUSTOM_P11_CONFIG_NAME`'s meaning becomes something like "base configuration file name".
>> 
>> Given the current test suite, and how I am specifying the use of Kryoptic, I wouldn't expect both `CUSTOM_P11_CONFIG_VARIANT` and `CUSTOM_P11_CONFIG_NAME` (or `CUSTOM_P11_CONFIG`) to be specified by the user at the same time.  `CUSTOM_P11_CONFIG_VARIANT` is meant for hard-coding in tests that invoke the test VM separately in sensitive and normal modes.
>> 
>>> Perhaps check the existence of the file and error out with the config file and its path if the check fails, this way, it's crystal clear.
>> 
>> OK, I can do that.  I will add a `/** ... */` block above `getNssConfig`.  These two changes will hopefully reduce the weirdness of the `CUSTOM_P11_CONFIG_NAME`/`CUSTOM_P11_CONFIG_VARIANT` combination.  I will also document the existing `CUSTOM_P11_CONFIG_NAME` versus `CUSTOM_P11_CONFIG` precedence since that might also be surprising when both are set.
>
> Done.  See what you think.  I am still open to other options.  One idea I played around with was adding a `CONFIG_P11_CONFIG_BASE_NAME` that is just part of the file name, say `p11-nss` by default.  Then in `getNssConfig` the file name could be built from the base and variant strings, instead of by changing the name.  Conceptually that might be clearer but I think it would be a more invasive change given that the existing code deals with file names.  And, having experimented with it, I think the new exception you suggested will make it fairly obvious what to fix if someone hits a missing configuration file.

It occurred to me that I might be able to simplify this patch if I use the same configuration file names for `Kryoptic` configuration, but allow setting a property to override the base path "./nss" (`nssDirDestination` in `copyNssFiles`).  Then the other tests wouldn't need any changes but could still run against `Kryoptic` even though they hard-code `p11-nss-sensitive.txt`.  The weirdness would then be that the `Kryoptic` configuration files are not named after their provider, but this could be documented.  I will try this approach tomorrow.

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/26325#discussion_r2314185051