Theoretical data race on java.util.logging.Handler.sealed

Peter Levart peter.levart at
Tue Jan 7 09:42:10 UTC 2014

Hi Mandy, Daniel,

Thanks for reviews. I just pushed this change to jdk9-dev/jdk ...

Regards, Peter

On 12/23/2013 05:50 AM, Mandy Chung wrote:
> On 12/22/2013 5:23 AM, Peter Levart wrote:
>> Hi Mandy,
>> On 12/19/2013 10:38 PM, Mandy Chung wrote:
>>> On 12/19/13 7:49 AM, Peter Levart wrote:
>>>> Hi Mandy, Daniel,
>>>> I didn't like the package-protected getters either. So here's 
>>>> another variant that replaces Handler.configure() method with a 
>>>> package-protected constructor which is chained from JDK subclasses:
>>> Looks good.  Thanks for making the change and the new test. It'd be 
>>> good to close the handlers by the test. The test is running in 
>>> othervm mode and the Cleaner thread will close the handler when VM 
>>> exits and the test is fine as it is.
>> Well, not really. The Cleaner only closes Handlers that are attached 
>> to Loggers but the test just instantiates Handlers and doesn't add 
>> them to any Loggers. It's harmless as it is, othervm will exit 
>> nevertheless and resources will be freed...
>> I tried closing Handlers at the end of test, but that requires 
>> "control" LoggingPermission and we don't want to run the test with 
>> "control" permission since we want to check that instantiating 
>> Handlers (SocketHandler too) doesn't require "control" permission.
> Thanks and the test is fine as it is.
>> So should anything else be done before pushing this to jdk9/dev ?
> Fix looks good and have a regression test.  It's good to go and push 
> to jdk9/dev.    No other approval needed.
> thanks
> Mandy

More information about the core-libs-dev mailing list