On Tue, 25 Mar 2025 08:31:02 GMT, Michael McMahon <micha...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>>> > > Seems like the only explanation for why that is happening is someone >>> > > cleaning out /tmp while the test is running >>> > >>> > >>> > @Michael-Mc-Mahon No, the reason for the failure is multiple threads >>> > creating a Unix socket in the very same `tempDir`, and then trying to >>> > delete the `tempDir`. See the following execution flow involving multiple >>> > threads: >>> > ``` >>> > 1. `tempDir` is statically assigned during class initialization (say >>> > `/tmp/readWriteTest2414375588689416060`) >>> > >>> > 2. `Thread1` runs `beforeRun()`, which creates the Unix socket >>> > `/tmp/readWriteTest2414375588689416060/1` >>> > >>> > 3. `Thread2` runs `beforeRun()`, which creates the Unix socket >>> > `/tmp/readWriteTest2414375588689416060/2` >>> > >>> > 4. Both `Thread1` and `Thread2` runs `afterRun()` in parallel >>> > >>> > 5. `Thread1` runs `Files.delete(/tmp/readWriteTest2414375588689416060/1)` >>> > and succeeds >>> > >>> > 6. `Thread2` runs `Files.delete(/tmp/readWriteTest2414375588689416060/2)` >>> > and succeeds >>> > >>> > 7. `Thread1` runs `Files.delete(/tmp/readWriteTest2414375588689416060)` >>> > and succeeds (since both `/1` and `/2` socket files are removed above, >>> > and, hence, the directory is empty) >>> > >>> > 8. `Thread2` runs `Files.delete(/tmp/readWriteTest2414375588689416060)` >>> > and fails, since the directory has already been deleted above >>> > ``` >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > Ideally, `tempDir` deletion should be performed by a single thread. But >>> > replacing `Files::delete` with `Files::deleteIfExists` also does the job, >>> > at a lower cost. >>> >>> What would happen then if thread1 completes before thread2 starts? Maybe, >>> we _should_ delete the directory in a separate block, executed in a single >>> thread at the every end. Is there a variant of the @teardown() annotation >>> which executes at the end of the test? >> >> maybe the directory could be created and deleted in separate >> Setup/Teardown(Level.Trial) invocations ? > >> @Michael-Mc-Mahon, I use dedicated temporary directory per socket in >> [cabb414](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/commit/cabb4145759a982ba32e9ade82066cfc75b5f05d). >> This reduces the amount of boilerplate for socket file administration (-13 >> LoC), and avoids any synchronization due to its shared-nothing state. Is >> this okay with you? > > Looks good! @Michael-Mc-Mahon @jaikiran Thanks so much for the assistance! 🙇 ------------- PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/24126#issuecomment-2752326427
