On Thu, 9 Jul 2026 08:06:07 GMT, Andreas Chmielewski <[email protected]> 
wrote:

>> On 2nd thought, let's keep a timeout for the `visibility` test only. That 
>> test spawns a new VM per a cipher suite, we'll think how to avoid this. The 
>> `handshake` test should run fine with a default timeout.
>
> Looking at the implementation, both the visibility and handshake runs 
> currently spawn a separate VM per test case. The visibility run uses all 
> supported suites (~90), while the handshake run uses only the enabled suites 
> (~30).
> Instead of increasing the timeout further, I can combine the visibility and 
> handshake checks in the same child VM invocation. That would reduce the 
> number of VM spawns by about 30.
> Unfortunately, the test would still need to spawn a VM for each cipher-suite. 
> With roughly 90 supported suites and three test cases per suite (disable by 
> cipher suite, disable by bulk cipher, and a positive bulk-cipher test), there 
> would still be around 270 child VM invocations.
> By doing that way we can east least reduce a bit the total execution time. 
> With that change, I would keep the timeout at 480, as you suggested.
> What do you think?

I actually looked into this approach. One complication is that building the 
test matrix requires a fresh JVM where SSLContext has not been initialized yet. 
Once SSLContext has been initialized, changing jdk.tls.disabledAlgorithms via 
Security.setProperty() does not appear to have the desired effect anymore.

So, i am fine with changing the timeout for the `visibility` test to 480 and 
keeping the 'default' for the `handshake` test

-------------

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/31812#discussion_r3550730833

Reply via email to