> On 20 Oct 2016, at 15:41, David Holmes <david.hol...@oracle.com> wrote: > > On 20/10/2016 11:27 PM, Staffan Larsen wrote: >> When looking for some timeout handler problems I found a few things that >> should be fixed: >> >> * Strange use of Thread.currentThread().interrupt() > > That isn't "strange" it is an idiomatic usage - if you can't propagate the > InterruptedException to show your caller you have been interrupted then you > re-assert the interrupt state.
OK, then. In this case it is less “strange” than “wrong”. The cases where this is done should not propagate the interrupt state - it only serves to throw unexpected exceptions higher up in the call-chain. > > Cheers, > David > >> * Add logging for timeouts >> * Milliseconds sometimes printed as microseconds or nanoseconds >> * Should use destroyForcibly() to terminate processes >> * No need to sleep in the last iteration when running a command multiple >> times >> * Disable timeout handling timeouts since we do that ourselves >> >> I didn’t want to file individual bugs for all of these, so I have lumped >> them together in one bug. >> >> bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8168414 >> <https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8168414>webrev: >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sla/8168414/webrev.00 >> <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sla/8168414/webrev.00> >> >> Thanks, >> /Staffan >>
