RFR 7191662: JCE providers should be located via ServiceLoader

Valerie (Yu-Ching) Peng valerie.peng at oracle.com
Wed Jun 3 17:27:16 UTC 2015

Correct, if the makefile related changes are removed then no need for 
build team to review 7191662 webrev anymore.
There are other discussions ongoing and we should be able to reach a 
decision in a day or two.
Will update the list again.

On 06/01/15 16:39, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
> On 2015-05-29 00:10, Valerie Peng wrote:
>> Please find comments in line...
>> On 5/27/2015 3:42 PM, Mandy Chung wrote:
>>> Valerie,
>>> Did you see my comment yesterday?
>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-May/012254.html 
>> Yes, we exchanged emails after this above one. I will follow up your 
>> latest one later today.
>>> Since you have reverted the java.security to keep the classname, to 
>>> avoid causing merge conflict to jimage refresh, let’s remove the 
>>> META-INF files in the first push and the build change.
>>> The security providers will be loaded via the fallback mechanism 
>>> (i.e. ProviderLoader.legacyLoad method).  You should keep the 
>>> ProviderLoader.load method to take the provider name instead of 
>>> classname.
>> Sure, I can remove the META-INF files so the providers are loaded 
>> through the legacyLoad().
>> Hmm, the ProviderLoader.load() method is used by java.security file 
>> provider loading. Since the current list still uses class name, it 
>> should take class name when checking for matches while iterating 
>> through the list returned by ServiceLoader.
>> This way, when changes are sync'ed into Jake, no extra change 
>> required and the providers will be loaded through 
>> ProviderLoader.load() automatically with the current list.
>>> I’ll file a bug to follow up to change java.security to list the 
>>> provider name.  This will wait after the jimage refresh goes into 
>>> jdk9/dev
>> Ok.
>> Thanks,
>> Valerie
> I'm not sure I followed completely here were this landed. Does this 
> mean that there's currently no need for a build system code review on 
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~valeriep/7191662/webrev.01/, and that a 
> new webrev will be posted instead?
> /Magnus
>>> .
>>> Mandy
>>>> On May 27, 2015, at 3:29 PM, Valerie Peng<valerie.peng at oracle.com>  
>>>> wrote:
>>>> Hi, build experts,
>>>> Can you please review the make file related change, i.e. the new 
>>>> file make/gensrc/Gensrc-java.naming.gmk, in the following webrev:
>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~valeriep/7191662/webrev.01/
>>>> This is for merging the java.security.Provider file from various 
>>>> providers and use the (merged) result for the final image build.
>>>> The rest of source code changes are reviewed by my team already.
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Valerie
>>>> (Java Security Team)

More information about the build-dev mailing list