Re: RFR 8033271: Manual security tests have @ignore rather than @run main/manual

2014-03-17 Thread Xuelei Fan
Looks fine to me. Thank you, Rajan! Xuelei On 3/18/2014 4:17 AM, Rajan Halade wrote: > Thanks again! Updated review with corrections - > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~wetmore/8033271/webrev.03/ > > - Rajan > > On 3/14/2014 18:36, Xuelei Fan wrote: >> Minimal comments: >> >> test/sun/security/

Re: RFR 8033271: Manual security tests have @ignore rather than @run main/manual

2014-03-17 Thread Rajan Halade
Thanks again! Updated review with corrections - http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~wetmore/8033271/webrev.03/ - Rajan On 3/14/2014 18:36, Xuelei Fan wrote: Minimal comments: test/sun/security/smartcardio/TestAll.java == Looks like there is no actual update.

Re: Code review request 8037346, Need to terminate server process if client runs into problems

2014-03-17 Thread Wang Weijun
Looks good now. Thanks. --Max On Mar 17, 2014, at 17:17, Xuelei Fan wrote: > Update to use 30 seconds: > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~xuelei/8037346/webrev.00/

Re: Code review request 8037346, Need to terminate server process if client runs into problems

2014-03-17 Thread Xuelei Fan
On 3/17/2014 5:16 PM, Wang Weijun wrote: > > On Mar 17, 2014, at 17:06, Xuelei Fan wrote: > >> On 3/17/2014 4:59 PM, Wang Weijun wrote: >>> What is the problem now? Test fails after 120 seconds of default timeout? >>> >> These test are for shell script tests. The bug reported stated the >> serv

Re: Code review request 8037346, Need to terminate server process if client runs into problems

2014-03-17 Thread Xuelei Fan
Update to use 30 seconds: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~xuelei/8037346/webrev.00/ Thanks, Xuelei On 3/17/2014 5:06 PM, Xuelei Fan wrote: > On 3/17/2014 4:59 PM, Wang Weijun wrote: >> What is the problem now? Test fails after 120 seconds of default timeout? >> > These test are for shell script test

Re: Code review request 8037346, Need to terminate server process if client runs into problems

2014-03-17 Thread Wang Weijun
On Mar 17, 2014, at 17:06, Xuelei Fan wrote: > On 3/17/2014 4:59 PM, Wang Weijun wrote: >> What is the problem now? Test fails after 120 seconds of default timeout? >> > These test are for shell script tests. The bug reported stated the > server did not terminated on Windows. I think may be s

Re: Code review request 8037346, Need to terminate server process if client runs into problems

2014-03-17 Thread Xuelei Fan
On 3/17/2014 4:59 PM, Wang Weijun wrote: > What is the problem now? Test fails after 120 seconds of default timeout? > These test are for shell script tests. The bug reported stated the server did not terminated on Windows. I think may be shell script test is not controlled by the default timeou

Re: Code review request 8037346, Need to terminate server process if client runs into problems

2014-03-17 Thread Wang Weijun
What is the problem now? Test fails after 120 seconds of default timeout? This SO_TIMEOUT could be useful to make sure a test fails early, but I am not sure if the value is big enough. If the failure is rare, I would choose 30 seconds. --Max On Mar 17, 2014, at 16:34, Xuelei Fan wrote: > Hi,

Re: Code Review Request: 8031003: [Parfait] warnings from jdk/src/share/native/sun/security/jgss/wrapper: JNI exception pending

2014-03-17 Thread Wang Weijun
NativeUtil.h: 88: How about puts(s) or printf("%s", s) (in case s includes "%")? NativeUtil.c: 514-516: not necessary? 539-543: Why not TRACEn here? 639-659: It looks like if cbytes == NULL then the function returns NULL with no exception throwing and this would break something in GSSLibStub.

Code review request 8037346, Need to terminate server process if client runs into problems

2014-03-17 Thread Xuelei Fan
Hi, Please review this test fix: webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~xuelei/8037346/webrev.00/ Tests fix. If client runs into problems, the server side may be blocked on socket.accept(). This fix set SO_TIMEOUT to 5 seconds for each server socket, so that if client runs into problems, the serve