Deven,

Thank you!


On 2012-04-26 05:21, Deven You wrote:
> Hi Dmitry,
> 
> Thanks for your help. I have created a CR with internal id 2236492 which
> hasn't be published yet. So please set this internal CR id as duplicate
> to 716419 as well.
> 
> This is the original mail for this problem:
> 
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Hi core-libs-devs,
> 
> I am not sure if sun.management.Agent belongs to jmx-dev mailing list,
> if so please anyone tell me.
> 
> This issue is that the sun.management.Agent.loadManagementProperties()
> will invoke properties.putAll which will throw
> ConcurrentModifcationException if there are other threads which modify
> the properties concurrently.
> 
> I have made a patch[1] which synchronize the sysProps so that putAll can
> work on multi-thread scenario. The test case is also available in [1].
> 
> Thanks a lot!
> 
> [1] http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~littlee/OJDK-256/webrev.00
> <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Elittlee/OJDK-256/webrev.00>
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> Thanks a lot!
> 
> 
> 
> On 04/25/2012 08:32 PM, Dmitry Samersoff wrote:
>> Deven,
>>
>> CR number is  7164191 .
>>
>> Could you re-send me your original e-mail with problem description and
>> webrev link.
>>
>>   I'll put it to CR comment field.
>>
>>
>> -Dmitry
>>
>>
>>
>> On 2012-04-24 16:15, Dmitry Samersoff wrote:
>>> Deven,
>>>
>>> After close look and off-line discussion with David Holmes,
>>> the changes looks good for me.
>>>
>>> I'll take care of the rest.
>>>
>>> We have one more place in Agent.java executing exactly the same code
>>> so I'll change both of them on your behalf.
>>>
>>> -Dmitry
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2012-04-23 11:43, Deven You wrote:
>>>> Thanks David,
>>>>
>>>> So is it ok for you to contribute this patch?
>>>>
>>>> On 04/23/2012 02:36 PM, David Holmes wrote:
>>>>> Except of course that Properties is a Hashtable and synchronizes on
>>>>> 'this' for all public methods. So locking the properties object in the
>>>>> client code will guarantee exclusive access to it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Sorry about that.
>>>>>
>>>>> David
>>>>> -----
>>>>>
>>>>> On 23/04/2012 4:30 PM, David Holmes wrote:
>>>>>> Deven,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 23/04/2012 3:54 PM, Deven You wrote:
>>>>>>> On 04/18/2012 02:20 PM, Deven You wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 04/18/2012 01:34 PM, Mandy Chung wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I think this could still run into CME. System Properties is not a
>>>>>>>>> synchronized map and the setter methods (System.setProperty or
>>>>>>>>> Properties.put method) doesn't synchronize on the Properties
>>>>>>>>> object.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The setter methods I'm referring to are System.setProperty and
>>>>>>>>> System.getProperties().put().
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I have gone through the Agent.java, I think other set/put methods
>>>>>>>> related to properties are protected properly.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> public static void agentmain using parseString(args) which return a
>>>>>>>> properties which is a local var and is not possible to cause
>>>>>>>> concurrent problem when call config_props.putAll(arg_props).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> private static synchronized void startLocalManagementAgent() is
>>>>>>>> synchronized already.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> private static synchronized void startRemoteManagementAgent(String
>>>>>>>> args) is synchronized also.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Could you point where the CME may ocurr?
>>>>>>> Is there any suggestion from the mailing list?
>>>>>> The problem is that System.getProperties() returns a globally
>>>>>> accessible
>>>>>> set of properties. So even if you prevent the Agent code from
>>>>>> modifying
>>>>>> those properties concurrently with other use in the Agent, you
>>>>>> have no
>>>>>> such guard for any other piece of code in the system which might also
>>>>>> modify the properties. So the race condition you were trying to fix
>>>>>> still exists. I don't see any way to fix this. No matter what you do
>>>>>> another thread can modify the system properties while you are
>>>>>> iterating
>>>>>> them. Instead you need to anticipate the CME and try to recover
>>>>>> from it
>>>>>> (also non-trivial).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>> David Holmes
>>>>
>>>
>>
> 
> 


-- 
Dmitry Samersoff
Java Hotspot development team, SPB04
* There will come soft rains ...

Reply via email to