Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

JDK-8296406: ChainingConstructors jtreg test reduce code duplication #11016

Closed
wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

MBaesken
Copy link
Member

@MBaesken MBaesken commented Nov 7, 2022

The java/security/Exceptions/ChainingConstructors jdk jtreg test shows quite a lot of code duplication. The test code can be simplified e.g. by using generics. Additionally the test failure output was improved and a test for the constructors of CertPathBuilderException was added.


Progress

  • Change must be properly reviewed (1 review required, with at least 1 Reviewer)
  • Change must not contain extraneous whitespace
  • Commit message must refer to an issue

Issue

  • JDK-8296406: ChainingConstructors jtreg test reduce code duplication

Reviewers

Reviewing

Using git

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk pull/11016/head:pull/11016
$ git checkout pull/11016

Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/11016
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.org/jdk pull/11016/head

Using Skara CLI tools

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 11016

View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 11016

Using diff file

Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/11016.diff

@bridgekeeper
Copy link

bridgekeeper bot commented Nov 7, 2022

👋 Welcome back mbaesken! A progress list of the required criteria for merging this PR into master will be added to the body of your pull request. There are additional pull request commands available for use with this pull request.

@openjdk openjdk bot added the rfr Pull request is ready for review label Nov 7, 2022
@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Nov 7, 2022

@MBaesken The following label will be automatically applied to this pull request:

  • security

When this pull request is ready to be reviewed, an "RFR" email will be sent to the corresponding mailing list. If you would like to change these labels, use the /label pull request command.

@openjdk openjdk bot added the security security-dev@openjdk.org label Nov 7, 2022
@mlbridge
Copy link

mlbridge bot commented Nov 7, 2022

Webrevs

@mcpowers
Copy link
Contributor

mcpowers commented Nov 7, 2022

LGTM

@seanjmullan
Copy link
Member

Add a noreg-self label to the JBS issue since this is a fix to the test itself. Also, I would classify this as an Enhancement, and not a Bug.

@MBaesken
Copy link
Member Author

MBaesken commented Nov 8, 2022

Add a noreg-self label to the JBS issue since this is a fix to the test itself. Also, I would classify this as an Enhancement, and not a Bug.

Thanks, this all makes sense ! I adjusted the JBS issue.

@@ -37,174 +37,35 @@ public class ChainingConstructors {
private static final String MSG = "msg";
private static Exception cause = new Exception("cause");

public static void main(String[] args) throws Exception {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I would add the bugid to line 26 since you are adding an additional test for CertPathBuilderException.

Comment on lines -198 to -208
/*
SSLException ssle =
new SSLException(cause);
if (!ssle.getCause().equals(cause)) {
throw new SecurityException("Test 17 failed");
}
ssle =new SSLException(MSG, cause);
if (!ssle.getMessage().equals(MSG) || !ssle.getCause().equals(cause)) {
throw new SecurityException("Test 17 failed");
}
*/
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I don't know why this is commented out, but when I uncomment it, the test still passes, so I would include a test for SSLException below.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Hi Sean, the summary says that the test is about "java.security Exceptions" so javax.net.ssl.SSLException.java from another package might not fit in, maybe that's why it was commented out.
Should I still add it ? If so, the summary comment might need a little bit adjustment, what about this "Test constructors for exception chaining of security-related exceptions" ?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Good point. I think it is ok to make an exception (no pun intended) for SSLException for this test. Changing the summary comment to your suggestion is fine with me.

@MBaesken
Copy link
Member Author

MBaesken commented Nov 8, 2022

I added the second bug id, adjusted the summary comment and added SSLException for this test.

Copy link
Member

@seanjmullan seanjmullan left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good!

@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Nov 8, 2022

@MBaesken This change now passes all automated pre-integration checks.

ℹ️ This project also has non-automated pre-integration requirements. Please see the file CONTRIBUTING.md for details.

After integration, the commit message for the final commit will be:

8296406: ChainingConstructors jtreg test reduce code duplication

Reviewed-by: mullan

You can use pull request commands such as /summary, /contributor and /issue to adjust it as needed.

At the time when this comment was updated there had been 17 new commits pushed to the master branch:

  • dd5d4df: 8295658: G1: Refactor G1SegmentedArray to indicate that it is an allocator
  • cf65605: 8296445: C++ syntax error in jdwpTransport.h
  • 1169dc0: 8296447: RISC-V: Make the operands order of vrsub_vx/vrsub_vi consistent with RVV 1.0 spec
  • 4c80dff: 8296435: RISC-V: Small refactoring for increment/decrement
  • 47d2c7b: 8295376: Improve debug agent virtual thread performance when no debugger is attached
  • 76790ad: 8295673: Deprecate and disable legacy parallel class loading workaround for non-parallel-capable class loaders
  • b6738c1: 8295663: Rephrase introduction to testing.md
  • 7e85b41: 8296154: [macos] Change "/Applications" to "Applications" in DMG image
  • 60db5f2: 8294020: improve errors for record declarations
  • 520db1e: 8296485: BuildEEBasicConstraints.java test fails with SunCertPathBuilderException
  • ... and 7 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/8836b92593565e66d8063b1228d6701316f3078d...master

As there are no conflicts, your changes will automatically be rebased on top of these commits when integrating. If you prefer to avoid this automatic rebasing, please check the documentation for the /integrate command for further details.

➡️ To integrate this PR with the above commit message to the master branch, type /integrate in a new comment.

@openjdk openjdk bot added the ready Pull request is ready to be integrated label Nov 8, 2022
@MBaesken
Copy link
Member Author

MBaesken commented Nov 9, 2022

Mark and Sean, thanks for the reviews !
Do I need another review ?
Best regards, Matthias

@seanjmullan
Copy link
Member

Mark and Sean, thanks for the reviews ! Do I need another review ? Best regards, Matthias

No, you can integrate now.

@MBaesken
Copy link
Member Author

MBaesken commented Nov 9, 2022

/integrate

@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Nov 9, 2022

Going to push as commit d4376f8.
Since your change was applied there have been 27 commits pushed to the master branch:

  • 4a0093c: 8294362: UL: Replace the internal usage of manual buffers with stringStream in LogSelection
  • fef68bb: 8296515: RISC-V: Small refactoring for MaxReductionV/MinReductionV/AddReductionV node implementation
  • 82cbfb5: 8296140: Drop unused field java.util.Calendar.DATE_MASK
  • fd83764: 8296239: ISO 4217 Amendment 174 Update
  • d9b25e8: 8296426: x86: Narrow UseAVX and UseSSE flags
  • 8146e1a: 8296347: Memory leak from ClassPathDirEntry::_dir
  • 671f84b: 8296143: CertAttrSet's set/get mechanism is not type-safe
  • d04d656: 8296433: Encountered null CLD while loading shared lambda proxy class
  • 74f2b16: 8295303: cleanup debug agent's confusing use of EI_GC_FINISH
  • 0ee25de: 8296504: Memory leak in G1PLABAllocator::PLABData
  • ... and 17 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/8836b92593565e66d8063b1228d6701316f3078d...master

Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts.

@openjdk openjdk bot added the integrated Pull request has been integrated label Nov 9, 2022
@openjdk openjdk bot closed this Nov 9, 2022
@openjdk openjdk bot removed ready Pull request is ready to be integrated rfr Pull request is ready for review labels Nov 9, 2022
@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Nov 9, 2022

@MBaesken Pushed as commit d4376f8.

💡 You may see a message that your pull request was closed with unmerged commits. This can be safely ignored.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
integrated Pull request has been integrated security security-dev@openjdk.org
3 participants