Thank you Martin!
On 11.03.2014 19:04, Martin Buchholz wrote:
Thanks for working on my brittle racy tests.
Adding a latch as you did is a good improvement, although there's a
good chance the real problem lies elsewhere.
My standard name for such latches is "threadsStarted", which I think
is a bit better than "startedSignal". Please rename.
No problem, renamed.
My simple calls to Thread.join are too optimistic.
More likely to be helpful is code like (pseudocode follows):
thread.join(10, SECONDS);
if (thread.isAlive()) {
dumpAllStacks();
fail();
}
Yes, it was a good idea to do that!
After implementing your suggestion, I could finally reproduce the failure.
The OpenLoop child thread was spinning in the do-while loop, waiting for
'count of fds in use' to become 3.
The simple solution is to add a check weather the current thread is
interrupted to this and other loops.
Would you please take a look at the updated webrev?
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~igerasim/8034262/1/webrev/
Sincerely yours,
Ivan
That's more work to implement - optional.
On Tue, Mar 11, 2014 at 5:24 AM, Ivan Gerasimov
<ivan.gerasi...@oracle.com <mailto:ivan.gerasi...@oracle.com>> wrote:
Hello everybody!
The test java/lang/ProcessBuilder/CloseRace.java was reported to
intermittently fail.
The test timed out, which should mean that at least one of the
child threads was never interrupted.
I couldn't reproduce the failure, but I suspect it might happen
due to call to interrupt() before the child thread became alive
(I'm not really sure if it's possible to be non-alive after call
to start()).
The fix is to explicitly synchronize children with the parent.
Would you please help review the fix?
BUGURL: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8034262
WEBREV: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~igerasim/8034262/0/webrev/
<http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Eigerasim/8034262/0/webrev/>
Sincerely yours,
Ivan
