-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5.5k
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
8302069: javax/management/remote/mandatory/notif/NotifReconnectDeadlockTest.java update #12472
8302069: javax/management/remote/mandatory/notif/NotifReconnectDeadlockTest.java update #12472
Conversation
…ckTest.java No reconnection happened
👋 Welcome back kevinw! A progress list of the required criteria for merging this PR into |
@kevinjwalls The following labels will be automatically applied to this pull request:
When this pull request is ready to be reviewed, an "RFR" email will be sent to the corresponding mailing lists. If you would like to change these labels, use the /label pull request command. |
@kevinjwalls 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:
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 49 new commits pushed to the
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 |
Thanks! |
/integrate |
Going to push as commit 1c7b09b.
Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts. |
@kevinjwalls Pushed as commit 1c7b09b. 💡 You may see a message that your pull request was closed with unmerged commits. This can be safely ignored. |
NotifReconnectDeadlockTest.java has been problemlisted for a long time (although 8042215 is the wrong bug id).
The originally reported problem ("No reconnection happened") cannot be reproduced, although there are occasional failures when the test is run.
Those failures are more like the connection failures fixed in similar tests (e.g. JDK-8227337), where:
java.rmi.NoSuchObjectException: no such object in table
..is reported, a startup issue, before the notification work, a failure to connect:
at java.management/javax.management.remote.JMXConnectorFactory.connect(JMXConnectorFactory.java:270)
at NotifReconnectDeadlockTest.main(NotifReconnectDeadlockTest.java:88)
We should do something similar here, but not such that it affects the deadlock timing. Increase serverTimeout, it needs a longer timeout to permit the initial connect to work reliably (fails occasionally, particularly but not exclusively on Windows debug builds). Not using the test library timeout scaling here as the timeout has to be kept fairly short, to let the test intentionally block the notification handler and try to cause the original issue.
Additional prints to make the test logs hopefully easier to follow, and tried to clarify a few comments that made no sense to me.
Passing on many runs on all platforms.
Progress
Issue
Reviewers
Reviewing
Using
git
Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk pull/12472/head:pull/12472
$ git checkout pull/12472
Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/12472
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.org/jdk pull/12472/head
Using Skara CLI tools
Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 12472
View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 12472
Using diff file
Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/12472.diff