On Tue, 3 Jun 2025 09:43:38 GMT, Fernando Guallini <fguall...@openjdk.org>
wrote:
>> test/jdk/java/security/PEM/PEMData.java line 49:
>>
>>> 47: +OO4oO0VNduC44gUN1nrk7/wdNSpL+xXNEX52Dsff+2RD/fop224ANvB
>>> 48: -----END PRIVATE KEY-----
>>> 49: """, KeyPair.class, "SunEC");
>>
>> When possible, we've been replacing hard-coded provider names with the
>> system property, such as `System.getProperty("test.provider.name",
>> "SunEC")`.
>>
>> Is that appropriate for these tests?
>
> I think that may not applicable for these tests, as there are multiple
> providers in this file to support all of the PEM decodings. It would need
> something like:"test.provider.1.name", "test.provider.2.name" and so on, it
> may be too confusing.
Yeah that wouldn't be good.
>> test/jdk/sun/security/pkcs/pkcs8/PKCS8Test.java line 34:
>>
>>> 32: * java.base/sun.security.x509
>>> 33: * @run main PKCS8Test
>>> 34: * @run main/othervm -Dtest.provider.name=SunJCE PKCS8Test
>>
>> I'm curious why you're specifying the provider name this way instead of
>> using the `System.getProperty("test.provider.name", "SunJCE")` pattern?
>
> That is because this test is covering the scenarios with and without passing
> a provider ([line
> 80](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/6f18e8b29750bbb1281b35a0c0a66873ae5c61f8/test/jdk/sun/security/pkcs/pkcs8/PKCS8Test.java#L80))
Ah, I see that now. Thanks
-------------
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/25588#discussion_r2123554558
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/25588#discussion_r2123555016
