On Wed, 17 May 2023 20:03:37 GMT, Joe Darcy <da...@openjdk.org> wrote:
> > > Should this issue have a CSR for any behavioral changes? > > > > > > Well, you can certainly argue that every bug fix is a behavioral changes, > > right :) > > But seriously, I don't see how this PR could require a CSR. The only > > behavioral change is really that `jspawnhelper` can now no longer block and > > deadlock. But that's exactly how it should have behaved in the first place. > > Yes, some judgement is needed on behavioral changes; this was broached in > portions of my recent talk to the JCP EC: > > "Contributing to OpenJDK: Participating in stewardship for the long-term" > https://jcp.org/aboutJava/communityprocess/ec-public/materials/2023-04-12/Contributing_to_OpenJDK_2023_04_12.pdf > > The process spawning code is apparently tricky and subtle, so much so that > this will be apparently the third attempt at it since JDK 12. (I still have > memories of various platform-specific issues in process handling from my time > maintaining the launcher.) > > So I don't think the applicability of a CSR for this change should be > dismissed I've created a [Release Note](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8308297) (please feel to review it :) which outlines the "*behavioral change*". But this change is really just a simple bug fix for the case where the JVM leaves a hanging process (`jspawnhelper`) behind when it crashes. I don't really see see how a CSR will fit in here unless we start to treat crashes as "defined behavior" and start tracking them across releases. If you still think a CSR will be needed, please advice how it should look like? > and personally I would prefer a change like this be made early in JDK 22 > rather than a few weeks before JDK 21 rampdown; it is easier to address any > bug tail early in 22 rather than late in 21. First, this is a bug fix for an issue which impacts production usage of the JDK. Second, tt's a "first-day" bug introduced by [JDK-5049299](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-5049299) for JDK 8 (initially only active on Solaris). It started to manifest on Linux in JDK 13 when the `POSIX_SPAWN` launching mechanism was ported to Linux as well, **but** it was only detected some time after JDK 17 was released when a higher rate of production services started to migrate to JDK 17. I really don't want to go into a bike-shedding discussion about "*LTS releases are not special*", but I think this is a serious enough bug with a simple enough fix to resolve it as quick as possible (and downport it to JDK 17 as fast as possible). We are still more than two weeks before RDP 1 and we still have more than three month before GA so I don't see a reason not to fix this now. ------------- PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/13956#issuecomment-1556989917
