Hi David, et.al.
What would be the rest of the plan for testing?
Usually, changes come with tests and a plan.
What build parameters are needed to run a full set of tests with the change?
Are there build changes needed?
Thanks, Roger
On 10/23/2018 03:26 PM, David Lloyd wrote:
My plans to try jdk/submit have fallen through unfortunately, as I
cannot seem to gain direct or indirect access to that system. So I
guess I'm looking for any reviews on this patch now. Thomas has
volunteered to sponsor.
Thanks.
On Tue, Oct 23, 2018 at 10:49 AM Thomas Stüfe <thomas.stu...@gmail.com> wrote:
Here you go:
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8212828
If noone else steps in, I can sponsor the change for you.
Cheers, Thomas
On Tue, Oct 23, 2018 at 4:19 PM David Lloyd <david.ll...@redhat.com> wrote:
Sure. I don't have any tracking information on the bugreport one I
submitted, but if you can track that down and promote it, it would
save you some typing. Otherwise whatever you can do would be great,
thanks.
On Tue, Oct 23, 2018 at 9:02 AM Thomas Stüfe <thomas.stu...@gmail.com> wrote:
Oh, I can open a bug report on JBS for you. Should I?
(Now I understand the "reuse bug id").
On Tue, Oct 23, 2018 at 3:18 PM David Lloyd <david.ll...@redhat.com> wrote:
I've submitted a bug report via bugreport.java.com. If/when it gets
promoted to a proper JIRA with an issue number, I'll see if I can put
the patch up on jdk/submit.
On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 4:42 PM David Lloyd <david.ll...@redhat.com> wrote:
The issue 6850720 isn't _exactly_ to use POSIX_SPAWN for process
launching on Linux, but it's the closest I could find out of what are
really a surprisingly large number of issues that refer to posix_spawn
in one way or another relating to ProcessImpl. There's a different
issue to move from vfork to posix_spawn on Solaris, but I wasn't sure
if that one was quite right to hang this off of. Maybe it should be
yet another issue of its own.
Anyway: this is a follow-up to the email thread entitled "Runtime.exec
: vfork() concerns and a fix proposal", where it was casually
mentioned that maybe posix_spawn could become an option on Linux,
whereafter it could be thoroughly tested by brave individuals and
eventually maybe become the default on that platform, obsoleting the
vfork support for good.
The following patch does just that. I've tested it launching a
multi-process WildFly instance a bunch of times, in conjunction with
the conveniently existent "jdk.lang.Process.launchMechanism" property,
and nothing exploded so here it is. The usual deal with git patches:
apply directly through "patch -p1".
