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

8224829: AsyncSSLSocketClose.java has timing issue #446

Closed
wants to merge 3 commits into from

Conversation

RealCLanger
Copy link
Contributor

@RealCLanger RealCLanger commented Sep 29, 2021

Backport of 8224829: AsyncSSLSocketClose.java has timing issue.
To make this one fit better (and maybe future backports), I also included the new recordLock functionality from JDK-8221882.


Progress

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

Issue

  • JDK-8224829: AsyncSSLSocketClose.java has timing issue

Reviewers

Reviewing

Using git

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk11u-dev pull/446/head:pull/446
$ git checkout pull/446

Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/446
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk11u-dev pull/446/head

Using Skara CLI tools

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 446

View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 446

Using diff file

Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk11u-dev/pull/446.diff

@bridgekeeper
Copy link

@bridgekeeper bridgekeeper bot commented Sep 29, 2021

👋 Welcome back clanger! 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 changed the title Backport a4277e56c8e4cbf801d1e00daec79b37ad4fdb84 8224829: AsyncSSLSocketClose.java has timing issue Sep 29, 2021
@openjdk
Copy link

@openjdk openjdk bot commented Sep 29, 2021

This backport pull request has now been updated with issue from the original commit.

@openjdk openjdk bot added backport rfr labels Sep 29, 2021
@mlbridge
Copy link

@mlbridge mlbridge bot commented Sep 29, 2021

Webrevs

Copy link
Contributor

@TheRealMDoerr TheRealMDoerr left a comment

Right, we need the recordLock for this change. Unfortunately, JDK-8221882 is too large for a backport and the part you have taken from it is not small, either. So, we need to be careful when doing more backports in this area. Your version looks good to me.

@openjdk
Copy link

@openjdk openjdk bot commented Oct 4, 2021

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

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

8224829: AsyncSSLSocketClose.java has timing issue

Reviewed-by: mdoerr

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 no new commits pushed to the master branch. If another commit should be pushed before you perform the /integrate command, your PR will be automatically rebased. If you prefer to avoid any potential 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 label Oct 4, 2021
@RealCLanger
Copy link
Contributor Author

@RealCLanger RealCLanger commented Oct 4, 2021

Right, we need the recordLock for this change. Unfortunately, JDK-8221882 is too large for a backport and the part you have taken from it is not small, either. So, we need to be careful when doing more backports in this area. Your version looks good to me.

Thanks for the review! Yes, the alternative would be to refactor the head change to use synchronized instead of recordLock but I think for possible future backports in that area I guess it's not a bad idea to use the new style locking. I went through the code quite thoroughly, to make sure I have catched every occurence of synchronization on the Record object and every usage of recordLock. I've spotted no regressions during testing.

@GoeLin
Copy link
Member

@GoeLin GoeLin commented Oct 5, 2021

Why is the Linux x86 integration test failing?

@RealCLanger
Copy link
Contributor Author

@RealCLanger RealCLanger commented Oct 5, 2021

Why is the Linux x86 integration test failing?

Hm, hotspot test compiler/types/correctness/OffTest.java... I'm pretty sure that this is an intermittent one. I can't think of how that could relate here. In any case, I'll merge in master to let GHA run once again.

@RealCLanger
Copy link
Contributor Author

@RealCLanger RealCLanger commented Oct 6, 2021

Why is the Linux x86 integration test failing?

Hm, hotspot test compiler/types/correctness/OffTest.java... I'm pretty sure that this is an intermittent one. I can't think of how that could relate here. In any case, I'll merge in master to let GHA run once again.

Now it looks better, although MacOS release build was skipped, probably for some infrastructure reasons.

@GoeLin
Copy link
Member

@GoeLin GoeLin commented Oct 6, 2021

Thanks!

@RealCLanger
Copy link
Contributor Author

@RealCLanger RealCLanger commented Oct 6, 2021

/integrate

@openjdk
Copy link

@openjdk openjdk bot commented Oct 6, 2021

Going to push as commit ceccbc3.

@openjdk openjdk bot closed this Oct 6, 2021
@openjdk openjdk bot added integrated and removed ready rfr labels Oct 6, 2021
@openjdk
Copy link

@openjdk openjdk bot commented Oct 6, 2021

@RealCLanger Pushed as commit ceccbc3.

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

@RealCLanger RealCLanger deleted the backport-8224829 branch Oct 6, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
backport integrated
3 participants