8254692: (se) Clarify the behaviour of the non-abstract SelectorProvider::inheritedChannel #745

fguallini · 2020-10-19T18:22:17Z

Please review this fix to provide spec clarity on the default implementation of java.nio.channels.spi.SelectorProvider::inheritedChannel() method which simply returns “null”, and a test for it.

Please review the corresponding CSR as well: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8254848

Progress

Change must not contain extraneous whitespace
Commit message must refer to an issue
Change must be properly reviewed

Testing

	Linux x64	Windows x64	macOS x64
Build	✔️ (5/5 passed)	✔️ (2/2 passed)	✔️ (2/2 passed)
Test (tier1)	✔️ (9/9 passed)	✔️ (9/9 passed)	✔️ (9/9 passed)

Issue

JDK-8254692: (se) Clarify the behaviour of the non-abstract SelectorProvider::inheritedChannel

Reviewers

Chris Hegarty (@ChrisHegarty - Reviewer)
Brian Burkhalter (@bplb - Reviewer) ⚠️ Review applies to 8006f0a
Alan Bateman (@AlanBateman - Reviewer)

Download

$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk pull/745/head:pull/745
$ git checkout pull/745

…od default behaviour

bridgekeeper · 2020-10-19T18:25:05Z

👋 Welcome back fguallini! 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 · 2020-10-19T18:28:24Z

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

nio

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.

mlbridge · 2020-10-19T18:31:28Z

Webrevs

openjdk · 2020-10-19T19:52:27Z

@fguallini 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:

8254692: (se) Clarify the behaviour of the non-abstract SelectorProvider::inheritedChannel

Reviewed-by: chegar, bpb, alanb

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 112 new commits pushed to the master branch:

c9269bf: 8255036: Shenandoah: Reset GC state for root verifier
839f01d: 8242068: Signed JAR support for RSASSA-PSS and EdDSA
e559bd2: 8254889: name_and_sig_as_C_string usages in frame coding without ResourceMark
da97ab5: 8253474: Javadoc clean up in HttpsExchange, HttpsParameters, and HttpsServer
7e26404: 8255000: C2: Unify IGVN processing when loop opts are over
27230fa: 8255026: C2: Miscellaneous cleanups in Compile and PhaseIdealLoop code
c107178: 8253964: [Graal] UnschedulableGraphTest#test01fails with expected:<4> but was:<3>
bd45191: 8255065: Zero: accessor_entry misses the IRIW case
2a06335: 8254785: compiler/graalunit/HotspotTest.java failed with "missing Graal intrinsics for: java/lang/StringLatin1.indexOfChar([BIII)I"
1b7ddeb: 8254976: Re-enable swing jtreg tests which were broken due to samevm mode
... and 102 more: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/compare/f3ce45f2a1ba0c91c601043125ca8691aa3deb36...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.

As you do not have Committer status in this project an existing Committer must agree to sponsor your change. Possible candidates are the reviewers of this PR (@ChrisHegarty, @bplb, @AlanBateman) but any other Committer may sponsor as well.

➡️ To flag this PR as ready for integration with the above commit message, type /integrate in a new comment. (Afterwards, your sponsor types /sponsor in a new comment to perform the integration).

bplb

Approved.

AlanBateman · 2020-10-20T07:06:21Z

test/jdk/java/nio/channels/etc/ProtocolFamilies.java

 import static org.testng.Assert.assertThrows;

 /*
 * @test
+ * @bug 8254692


test/jdk/java/nio/channels/spi/SelectorProvider/inheritedChannel would be a more appropriate location to test this.

I assume you modified etc/ProtocolFamilies.java you because it has a custom provider that doesn't override this method but this test has the summary "Test SocketChannel, ServerSocketChannel and DatagramChannel with various ProtocolFamily combinations" so not really the right place.

The test method being changed here assets other aspects of the default implementation of SelectorProvider - this is just another case. I guess is depends on ones view, whether these checks should be co-located based on functionality or based on category of behaviour. It might be best to create a new test/jdk/java/nio/channels/spi/SelectorProvider/DefaultImplementationTest.java to hold such, and move the other assertions there too. But the higher-order bit is that we have tests.

ProtocolFamilies/testCustomProvider exercises the methods that take a protocol family, it's not really the right place to exercise the inheritedChannel method. Can we add a test to test/jdk/java/nio/channels/spi/SelectorProvider/inheritedChannel instead?

No disagreement about testCustomProvider not being the most appropriate place to test the default implementation of inheritedChannel. What I was suggesting was to move all the assertions related to the default implementation of SelectorProvider to a single new test located under test/jdk/java/nio/channels/spi/SelectorProvider/, rather than splitting the tests for the default implementation across several different tests and directory hierarchies.

A new test/jdk/java/nio/channels/spi/SelectorProvider that covers all the assertions would be great, thanks!

Thank you Alan and Chris for reviewing, I moved all the assertions related to the default implementation from ProtocolFamilies to a new test class as suggested and removed unused imports in ProtocolFamilies

ChrisHegarty · 2020-10-20T08:17:23Z

/csr

openjdk · 2020-10-20T08:22:38Z

@ChrisHegarty this pull request will not be integrated until the CSR request JDK-8254848 for issue JDK-8254692 has been approved.

AlanBateman

Thanks for the new test. SelectorProvider has 3 non-abstract methods and the coverage looks good. "TestDefaultImplementation" might be a better name for the test but otherwise looks good.

fguallini · 2020-10-21T12:17:24Z

Thanks for the new test. SelectorProvider has 3 non-abstract methods and the coverage looks good. "TestDefaultImplementation" might be a better name for the test but otherwise looks good.

Sure, TestDefaultImplementation is a bit more accurate, therefore I renamed the test accordingly in the last commit.

fguallini · 2020-10-21T14:50:37Z

/integrate

openjdk · 2020-10-21T14:51:18Z

@fguallini
Your change (at version 4528ea4) is now ready to be sponsored by a Committer.

AlanBateman · 2020-10-21T14:53:47Z

/sponsor

openjdk · 2020-10-21T14:54:41Z

@AlanBateman @fguallini Since your change was applied there have been 112 commits pushed to the master branch:

c9269bf: 8255036: Shenandoah: Reset GC state for root verifier
839f01d: 8242068: Signed JAR support for RSASSA-PSS and EdDSA
e559bd2: 8254889: name_and_sig_as_C_string usages in frame coding without ResourceMark
da97ab5: 8253474: Javadoc clean up in HttpsExchange, HttpsParameters, and HttpsServer
7e26404: 8255000: C2: Unify IGVN processing when loop opts are over
27230fa: 8255026: C2: Miscellaneous cleanups in Compile and PhaseIdealLoop code
c107178: 8253964: [Graal] UnschedulableGraphTest#test01fails with expected:<4> but was:<3>
bd45191: 8255065: Zero: accessor_entry misses the IRIW case
2a06335: 8254785: compiler/graalunit/HotspotTest.java failed with "missing Graal intrinsics for: java/lang/StringLatin1.indexOfChar([BIII)I"
1b7ddeb: 8254976: Re-enable swing jtreg tests which were broken due to samevm mode
... and 102 more: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/compare/f3ce45f2a1ba0c91c601043125ca8691aa3deb36...master

Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts.

Pushed as commit f813a28.

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

fguallini added 2 commits Oct 19, 2020

add implSpec to SelectorProvider::inheritedChannel and tests for meth…

ff4eec1

…od default behaviour

add bug number to ProtocolFamilies test

8006f0a

openjdk bot added the rfr Pull request is ready for review label Oct 19, 2020

openjdk bot added the nio nio-dev@openjdk.org label Oct 19, 2020

ChrisHegarty approved these changes Oct 19, 2020

View changes

openjdk bot added the ready Pull request is ready to be integrated label Oct 19, 2020

bplb approved these changes Oct 19, 2020

View changes

AlanBateman reviewed Oct 20, 2020

View changes

openjdk bot added the csr Pull request needs approved CSR before integration label Oct 20, 2020

openjdk bot removed the ready Pull request is ready to be integrated label Oct 20, 2020

fguallini added 2 commits Oct 20, 2020

move SelectorProvider default implementation tests to a new test class

d4d5013

replace general static import to a more specific one

7787b74

openjdk bot added ready Pull request is ready to be integrated and removed csr Pull request needs approved CSR before integration labels Oct 20, 2020

AlanBateman approved these changes Oct 21, 2020

View changes

ChrisHegarty approved these changes Oct 21, 2020

View changes

rename test for default SelectorProvider implementation

4528ea4

AlanBateman approved these changes Oct 21, 2020

View changes

ChrisHegarty approved these changes Oct 21, 2020

View changes

openjdk bot added the sponsor Pull request is ready to be sponsored label Oct 21, 2020

openjdk bot closed this Oct 21, 2020

openjdk bot added integrated Pull request has been integrated and removed sponsor Pull request is ready to be sponsored ready Pull request is ready to be integrated rfr Pull request is ready for review labels Oct 21, 2020

8254692: (se) Clarify the behaviour of the non-abstract SelectorProvider::inheritedChannel #745

8254692: (se) Clarify the behaviour of the non-abstract SelectorProvider::inheritedChannel #745

fguallini commented Oct 19, 2020 •

edited by openjdk bot

bridgekeeper bot commented Oct 19, 2020

openjdk bot commented Oct 19, 2020 •

edited by bridgekeeper bot

mlbridge bot commented Oct 19, 2020 •

edited

openjdk bot commented Oct 19, 2020 •

edited

bplb left a comment

AlanBateman Oct 20, 2020

ChrisHegarty Oct 20, 2020

AlanBateman Oct 20, 2020

ChrisHegarty Oct 20, 2020

AlanBateman Oct 20, 2020

fguallini Oct 20, 2020

ChrisHegarty commented Oct 20, 2020

openjdk bot commented Oct 20, 2020

AlanBateman left a comment •

edited

fguallini commented Oct 21, 2020

fguallini commented Oct 21, 2020

openjdk bot commented Oct 21, 2020

AlanBateman commented Oct 21, 2020

openjdk bot commented Oct 21, 2020

8254692: (se) Clarify the behaviour of the non-abstract SelectorProvider::inheritedChannel #745

8254692: (se) Clarify the behaviour of the non-abstract SelectorProvider::inheritedChannel #745

Conversation

fguallini commented Oct 19, 2020 • edited by openjdk bot

Progress

Testing

Issue

Reviewers

Download

bridgekeeper bot commented Oct 19, 2020

openjdk bot commented Oct 19, 2020 • edited by bridgekeeper bot

mlbridge bot commented Oct 19, 2020 • edited

Webrevs

openjdk bot commented Oct 19, 2020 • edited

bplb left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

AlanBateman Oct 20, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

ChrisHegarty Oct 20, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

AlanBateman Oct 20, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

ChrisHegarty Oct 20, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

AlanBateman Oct 20, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

fguallini Oct 20, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

ChrisHegarty commented Oct 20, 2020

openjdk bot commented Oct 20, 2020

AlanBateman left a comment • edited

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

fguallini commented Oct 21, 2020

fguallini commented Oct 21, 2020

openjdk bot commented Oct 21, 2020

AlanBateman commented Oct 21, 2020

openjdk bot commented Oct 21, 2020

fguallini commented Oct 19, 2020 •

edited by openjdk bot

openjdk bot commented Oct 19, 2020 •

edited by bridgekeeper bot

mlbridge bot commented Oct 19, 2020 •

edited

openjdk bot commented Oct 19, 2020 •

edited

AlanBateman left a comment •

edited