rather like this :

> } catch (InterruptedException e) {
>    Thread.currentThread().interrupt();
>    return false; // assume not signed
> }

— Igor

> On Feb 11, 2020, at 6:15 PM, Chris Plummer <chris.plum...@oracle.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> Like this?
> 
>         } catch (InterruptedException e) {
>             Thread.currentThread().interrupt();
>             throw new RuntimeException(e);
>         }
> 
> Chris
> 
> On 2/11/20 2:23 PM, Igor Ignatyev wrote:
>> no, I meant to call Thread.currentThread().interrupt(), calling that will 
>> restore interrupted state of the thread, so an user of Platform class will 
>> be able to response to it appropriately, w/ your current code, the fact that 
>> the thread was interrupted will be missed, and in most cases it is not right 
>> thing to do.
>> 
>> -- Igor 
>> 
>>> On Feb 11, 2020, at 2:02 PM, Chris Plummer <chris.plum...@oracle.com 
>>> <mailto:chris.plum...@oracle.com>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi Igor,
>>> 
>>> I'm not sure what you mean by restore the interrupt state. Do you mean loop 
>>> back to the waitFor() call?
>>> 
>>> thanks,
>>> 
>>> Chris
>>> 
>>> On 2/11/20 1:55 PM, Igor Ignatyev wrote:
>>>> Hi Chris,
>>>> 
>>>> I don't insist on (3), so I'm fine if you don't want to change that part. 
>>>> one thing I'd change though is to restore thread interrupted state at 
>>>> L#266 of Platform.java (no need to publish new webrev)
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> -- Igor
>>>> 
>>>>> On Feb 11, 2020, at 1:49 PM, Chris Plummer <chris.plum...@oracle.com 
>>>>> <mailto:chris.plum...@oracle.com>> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> Hi Igor,
>>>>> 
>>>>> Here's an updated webrev:
>>>>> 
>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~cjplummer/8238196/webrev.01/index.html 
>>>>> <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~cjplummer/8238196/webrev.01/index.html>
>>>>> 
>>>>> I rebased to JDK 15 and made all the changes you suggested except for 
>>>>> (3). I did not think it is necessary since the code is only executed on 
>>>>> OSX. However, if you still feel allowing flexibility in the path 
>>>>> separator is important, I can add that change too.
>>>>> 
>>>>> thanks,
>>>>> 
>>>>> Chris
>>>>> 
>>>>> On 2/10/20 1:34 PM, Igor Ignatyev wrote:
>>>>>> Hi Chris,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> in general it all looks good, I have a few comments (most of them are 
>>>>>> editorial):
>>>>>> in Platform.java:
>>>>>> 1. you have doubled spaced at line#238 (b/w boolean and isSignedOSX)
>>>>>> 2. as FileNotFoundException is IOException, there is no need to declare 
>>>>>> the former in the signature of isSignedOSX
>>>>>> 3. it's better to pass jdkPath, "bin" and "java" as separate arguments 
>>>>>> to Path.get, so the code won't depend on file separator
>>>>>> 4. you are waiting for codesign to finish w/o reading its cout / cerr, 
>>>>>> which might lead to a deadlock (if codesign will exhaust IO buffer 
>>>>>> before exiting), so you need to either create two separate threads to 
>>>>>> read cout and cerr or  redirect these streams them to files and read 
>>>>>> these files afterwards or just ignore cout/cerr by using 
>>>>>> Redirect.DISCARD. I'd personally recommend the latter as the result of 
>>>>>> codesign can be reliably deduced from its exitcode (0 - signed, 1 - 
>>>>>> verification failed, 2 - wrong arguments, 3 - not all requirements from 
>>>>>> R are satisfied) and using cout/cerr is somewhat fragile as there is no 
>>>>>> guarantee output format won't be changed.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> the rest looks good to me.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> -- Igor
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Feb 10, 2020, at 11:48 AM, Chris Plummer <chris.plum...@oracle.com 
>>>>>>> <mailto:chris.plum...@oracle.com><mailto:chris.plum...@oracle.com 
>>>>>>> <mailto:chris.plum...@oracle.com>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Ping #2. It's not that hard of a review. Most of it is the new 
>>>>>>> Platform.isSignedOSX() method, which is well commented and pretty 
>>>>>>> straight froward.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> thanks,
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Chris
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On 2/4/20 5:04 PM, Chris Plummer wrote:
>>>>>>>> Ping!
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> And I decided to push to 15 instead of 14. Will backport to 14 
>>>>>>>> eventually.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> thanks,
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Chris
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On 1/30/20 10:20 PM, Chris Plummer wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Yes, you are correct:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8238196 
>>>>>>>>> <https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8238196>
>>>>>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~cjplummer/8238196/webrev.00 
>>>>>>>>> <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~cjplummer/8238196/webrev.00>
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> thanks,
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Chris
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> On 1/30/20 10:13 PM, Igor Ignatyev wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Hi Chris,
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~cjplummer/8236913/webrev.00Â 
>>>>>>>>>> <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~cjplummer/8236913/webrev.00%C3%82> 
>>>>>>>>>> seems to be a webrev from another issue, should it have been 
>>>>>>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~cjplummer/8238196/webrev.00/Â 
>>>>>>>>>> <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~cjplummer/8238196/webrev.00/%C3%82> ?
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> -- Igor
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> On Jan 30, 2020, at 10:10 PM, Chris Plummer 
>>>>>>>>>>> <chris.plum...@oracle.com 
>>>>>>>>>>> <mailto:chris.plum...@oracle.com><mailto:chris.plum...@oracle.com 
>>>>>>>>>>> <mailto:chris.plum...@oracle.com>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Please review the following fix for some SA tests that are failing 
>>>>>>>>>>> on Mac OS X 10.14.5 and later:
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8238196 
>>>>>>>>>>> <https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8238196>
>>>>>>>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~cjplummer/8236913/webrev.00 
>>>>>>>>>>> <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~cjplummer/8236913/webrev.00>
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> The issue is that SA can't attach to a signed binary starting with 
>>>>>>>>>>> 10.14.5. There is no workaround for this, so these tests are being 
>>>>>>>>>>> disabled when it is detected that the binary is signed and we are 
>>>>>>>>>>> running on 10.14 or later (I chose all 10.14 releases to simplify 
>>>>>>>>>>> the check).
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Some background may help explain the fix. In order for SA to attach 
>>>>>>>>>>> to a live process (not a core file) on OSX, either the attaching 
>>>>>>>>>>> process (ie. the test) has to be run as root, or sudo needs to be 
>>>>>>>>>>> supported. However, the only tests that make the sudo check are the 
>>>>>>>>>>> 20 or so that use ClhsdbLauncher. The rest all rely on "@requires 
>>>>>>>>>>> vm.hasSAandCanAttach" to filter out tests that use SA attach. 
>>>>>>>>>>> vm.hasSAandCanAttach only checks if the test is being run as root. 
>>>>>>>>>>> Thus all our non-ClhsdbLauncher tests that SA attach to a live 
>>>>>>>>>>> process are currently not run unless they are run as root. 8238268 
>>>>>>>>>>> [1] has been filed to address this, making it so all the tests will 
>>>>>>>>>>> attempt to use sudo if not run as root.
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Because of the difference in how ClhsdbLauncher tests and 
>>>>>>>>>>> "@requires vm.hasSAandCanAttach" tests check to see if they are 
>>>>>>>>>>> runnable, this fix needs to address both types of checks. The 
>>>>>>>>>>> common code for both these cases is Platform.shouldSAAttach(), 
>>>>>>>>>>> which on OSX basically equates to check to see if we are running as 
>>>>>>>>>>> root. I changed it to also return false if running on signed binary 
>>>>>>>>>>> with 10.14 or later. However, this confused the ClhsdbLauncher use 
>>>>>>>>>>> of Platform.shouldSAAttach() somewhat, since it assumed a false 
>>>>>>>>>>> result only happens because you are not running as root (in which 
>>>>>>>>>>> case it would then check if sudo will work). So ClhsdbLauncher now 
>>>>>>>>>>> has double check that the false result was not because of running a 
>>>>>>>>>>> signed binary. If it is signed, it won't do the sudo check. This 
>>>>>>>>>>> will get cleaned up with 8238268 [1], which will move the sudo 
>>>>>>>>>>> check into Platform.shouldSAAttach().
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> thanks,
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Chris
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> [1] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8238268 
>>>>>>>>>>> <https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8238268>
>>> 
>> 
> 

Reply via email to