[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-9738?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17280526#comment-17280526
]
Uwe Schindler edited comment on LUCENE-9738 at 2/7/21, 2:17 PM:
----------------------------------------------------------------
It is also documented in Java 8:
{quote}
...
The common pool is by default constructed with default parameters,...
If a SecurityManager is present and no factory is specified, then the default
pool uses a factory supplying threads that have no Permissions enabled. The
system class loader is used to load these classes. Upon any error in
establishing these settings, default parameters are used. It is possible to
disable or limit the use of threads in the common pool by setting the
parallelism property to zero, and/or using a factory that may return null.
However doing so may cause unjoined tasks to never be executed.
{quote}
https://docs.oracle.com/javase/8/docs/api/java/util/concurrent/ForkJoinPool.html
was (Author: thetaphi):
It is also documented in Java 8:
{quote}
...
The common pool is by default constructed with default parameters,...
If a SecurityManager is present and no factory is specified, then the default
pool uses a factory supplying threads that have no Permissions enabled. The
system class loader is used to load these classes. Upon any error in
establishing these settings, default parameters are used. It is possible to
disable or limit the use of threads in the common pool by setting the
parallelism property to zero, and/or using a factory that may return null.
However doing so may cause unjoined tasks to never be executed.
{quote}
https://docs.oracle.com/javase/8/docs/api/java/util/concurrent/ForkJoinPool.html#commonPool--
> Odd behavior with tests forked into the default ForkJoinPool
> ------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-9738
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-9738
> Project: Lucene - Core
> Issue Type: Bug
> Reporter: Dawid Weiss
> Assignee: Dawid Weiss
> Priority: Minor
> Attachments: LUCENE-9738.patch
>
>
> Just for the record, this will perhaps save somebody some search time. This
> test currently fails with out test policy:
> {code}
> public void testInsanity() throws ExecutionException, InterruptedException {
> // This is fine. This property should be read-accessible to anything in
> Java.
> System.getProperty("line.separator");
> // but this fails:
> ForkJoinTask<String> task =
> ForkJoinPool.commonPool()
> .submit(() -> System.getProperty("line.separator"));
> // Wait a bit to avoid job stealing.
> Thread.sleep(1000);
> task.get();
> {code}
> The above fails with a cryptic exception:
> {code}
> Caused by: java.security.AccessControlException: access denied
> ("java.util.PropertyPermission" "line.separator" "read")
> at
> java.base/java.security.AccessControlContext.checkPermission(AccessControlContext.java:472)
> at
> java.base/java.security.AccessController.checkPermission(AccessController.java:1036)
> at
> java.base/java.lang.SecurityManager.checkPermission(SecurityManager.java:408)
> at
> java.base/java.lang.SecurityManager.checkPropertyAccess(SecurityManager.java:1152)
> at java.base/java.lang.System.getProperty(System.java:847)
> at
> org.apache.lucene.TestPermissionsInsanity.lambda$testInsanity$0(TestPermissionsInsanity.java:38)
> at
> java.base/java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinTask$AdaptedCallable.exec(ForkJoinTask.java:1453)
> at
> java.base/java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinTask.doExec(ForkJoinTask.java:290)
> at
> java.base/java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinPool$WorkQueue.topLevelExec(ForkJoinPool.java:1016)
> at
> java.base/java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinPool.scan(ForkJoinPool.java:1665)
> at
> java.base/java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinPool.runWorker(ForkJoinPool.java:1598)
> at
> java.base/java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinWorkerThread.run(ForkJoinWorkerThread.java:177)
> {code}
> What's odd here is that we only have java.base classes and our own test class
> on the stack. Seems like by default forkjoin executors have some kind of
> protection domain that disallows everything... Escaping through
> AccessController works but it's still surprising that it's not a built-in
> thing.
> Or maybe I misunderstand something, don't know...
> CC [~rmuir] - you may find this interesting.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
