RFR: 8168414 Various timeouthandler fixes
staffan.larsen at oracle.com
Thu Oct 20 13:44:11 UTC 2016
> On 20 Oct 2016, at 15:41, David Holmes <david.holmes at oracle.com> wrote:
> On 20/10/2016 11:27 PM, Staffan Larsen wrote:
>> When looking for some timeout handler problems I found a few things that should be fixed:
>> * Strange use of Thread.currentThread().interrupt()
> That isn't "strange" it is an idiomatic usage - if you can't propagate the InterruptedException to show your caller you have been interrupted then you re-assert the interrupt state.
OK, then. In this case it is less “strange” than “wrong”. The cases where this is done should not propagate the interrupt state - it only serves to throw unexpected exceptions higher up in the call-chain.
>> * Add logging for timeouts
>> * Milliseconds sometimes printed as microseconds or nanoseconds
>> * Should use destroyForcibly() to terminate processes
>> * No need to sleep in the last iteration when running a command multiple times
>> * Disable timeout handling timeouts since we do that ourselves
>> I didn’t want to file individual bugs for all of these, so I have lumped them together in one bug.
>> bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8168414 <https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8168414>webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sla/8168414/webrev.00 <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sla/8168414/webrev.00>
More information about the build-dev