Request for review: 8005618 - TEST_BUG: java/lang/ProcessBuilder/Basic.java failing intermittently
Alan.Bateman at oracle.com
Tue Jan 15 11:55:10 UTC 2013
On 15/01/2013 01:31, David Holmes wrote:
> On 15/01/2013 7:12 AM, Rob McKenna wrote:
>> Simple enough fix but to be honest I'm not sure any value will *always*
>> work for the dead process waitFor(). Our testing infrastructure seems to
>> glide past whatever we consider to be acceptable tolerances.
> Using the latch seems reasonable but the existing wait/sleep times do
> not. Why waitFor(10000) if the main thread is going to interrupt you
> after a sleep(1000) ???
It's testing that Process.waitFor will be interrupted by
Thread.interrupt so it requires a thread to block in waitFor. Using
sleeps is always going to be problematic as the load on test machines is
unpredictable but I think Rob's proposed change does make this test a
bit more robust.
More information about the core-libs-dev