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

8311032: Empty value for java.protocol.handler.pkgs system property can lead to unnecessary classloading attempts of protocol handlers #14693

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

jaikiran
Copy link
Member

@jaikiran jaikiran commented Jun 28, 2023

Can I please get a review for this change which proposes to address https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8311032?

The commit in this PR skips the class lookups when the package name prefix is empty, either due to the java.protocol.handler.pkgs system property value being empty or due to individual parts of the | delimited value being empty.

This avoids potentially expensive classloading attempts for a class name of the form .foo.Handler, which is bound to fail.

No new jtreg test has been added given the nature of the change. There's already an existing test test/jdk/java/net/URL/HandlersPkgPrefix/HandlersPkgPrefix.java which tests different values for the java.protocol.handler.pkgs system property (including empty value) and that test continues to pass with this change.

tier testing is currently in progress.


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-8311032: Empty value for java.protocol.handler.pkgs system property can lead to unnecessary classloading attempts of protocol handlers (Bug - P4)

Reviewers

Reviewing

Using git

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/14693/head:pull/14693
$ git checkout pull/14693

Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/14693
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/14693/head

Using Skara CLI tools

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 14693

View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 14693

Using diff file

Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/14693.diff

Webrev

Link to Webrev Comment

…an lead to unnecessary classloading attempts of protocol handlers
@bridgekeeper
Copy link

bridgekeeper bot commented Jun 28, 2023

👋 Welcome back jpai! 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 Jun 28, 2023
@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Jun 28, 2023

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

  • net

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 net net-dev@openjdk.org label Jun 28, 2023
@mlbridge
Copy link

mlbridge bot commented Jun 28, 2023

Webrevs

@AlanBateman
Copy link
Contributor

No objection to changing this but I'm curious if this is a real issue or not. Have you seen deployments with -Dava.protocol.handler.pkgs= ? Just curious.

@jaikiran
Copy link
Member Author

jaikiran commented Jun 28, 2023

Hello Alan, this issue with empty value was noticed when trying to get past the other issue noted in https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8308184. The reporter of that other issue tried to workaround that StackOverflowError, by trying to conditionally set the value for this system property only when they thought it might be necessary. The workaround was of the form '-Djava.protocol.handler.pkg=${var}'. In such builds, 'var' would evaluate to empty when they didn't want to set any genuine package name. It was expected that using this workaround would prevent the StackOverflowError when large classpaths were involved. But given the way this code currently deals with empty value, it still ended up scanning the large classpath for an unnecessary class and eventually again ended up with the StackOverflowError.

So this change is to prevent such cases, which in reality should be rare.

Copy link
Member

@dfuch dfuch left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM. Please double check that there's no issue with tier2.

@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Jun 28, 2023

@jaikiran 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:

8311032: Empty value for java.protocol.handler.pkgs system property can lead to unnecessary classloading attempts of protocol handlers

Reviewed-by: dfuchs

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 19 new commits pushed to the master branch:

  • ded1370: 8309811: BytecodePrinter cannot handle unlinked classes
  • 02b17d7: 8310264: In PhaseChaitin::Split defs and phis are leaked
  • a63afa4: 8294427: Check boxes and radio buttons have rendering issues on Windows in High DPI env
  • 3df36c4: 8310061: Note if implicit annotation processing is being used
  • da0f832: 8310606: Fix signed integer overflow, part 3
  • f0c2f09: 8296972: [macos13] java/awt/Frame/MaximizedToIconified/MaximizedToIconified.java: getExtendedState() != 6 as expected.
  • 9f46fc2: 8310906: Fix -Wconversion warnings in runtime, oops and some code header files.
  • 7fffdb5: 8310405: Linker.Option.firstVariadicArg should specify which index values are valid
  • b6c789f: 8309140: ResourceHashtable failed "assert(~(_allocation_t[0] | allocation_mask) == (uintptr_t)this) failed: lost resource object"
  • 9f98136: 6956385: URLConnection.getLastModified() leaks file handles for jar:file and file: URLs
  • ... and 9 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/526dba1a2942e444bf11d03d8eaf014b5ef20ccf...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 Jun 28, 2023
@jaikiran
Copy link
Member Author

Thank you Alan and Daniel for reviewing this change. tier1, tier2 and tier3 testing with this change came back without any failures.

@jaikiran
Copy link
Member Author

/integrate

@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Jun 29, 2023

Going to push as commit 8f5a384.
Since your change was applied there have been 19 commits pushed to the master branch:

  • ded1370: 8309811: BytecodePrinter cannot handle unlinked classes
  • 02b17d7: 8310264: In PhaseChaitin::Split defs and phis are leaked
  • a63afa4: 8294427: Check boxes and radio buttons have rendering issues on Windows in High DPI env
  • 3df36c4: 8310061: Note if implicit annotation processing is being used
  • da0f832: 8310606: Fix signed integer overflow, part 3
  • f0c2f09: 8296972: [macos13] java/awt/Frame/MaximizedToIconified/MaximizedToIconified.java: getExtendedState() != 6 as expected.
  • 9f46fc2: 8310906: Fix -Wconversion warnings in runtime, oops and some code header files.
  • 7fffdb5: 8310405: Linker.Option.firstVariadicArg should specify which index values are valid
  • b6c789f: 8309140: ResourceHashtable failed "assert(~(_allocation_t[0] | allocation_mask) == (uintptr_t)this) failed: lost resource object"
  • 9f98136: 6956385: URLConnection.getLastModified() leaks file handles for jar:file and file: URLs
  • ... and 9 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/526dba1a2942e444bf11d03d8eaf014b5ef20ccf...master

Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts.

@openjdk openjdk bot added the integrated Pull request has been integrated label Jun 29, 2023
@openjdk openjdk bot closed this Jun 29, 2023
@openjdk openjdk bot removed ready Pull request is ready to be integrated rfr Pull request is ready for review labels Jun 29, 2023
@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Jun 29, 2023

@jaikiran Pushed as commit 8f5a384.

💡 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 net net-dev@openjdk.org
3 participants