Hi Alan, thanks for the review, i think there is some problem with webrev, in my local repo linux_close.c, bsd_close.c both are properly formatted.
I will do the suggested changes in the tests and will send the updated webrev soon. Thanks, Vyom On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 11:49 AM Alan Bateman <alan.bate...@oracle.com> wrote: > On 24/06/2020 05:53, Vyom Tiwari wrote: > > Hi Daniel/Alan, > > > > Thanks for the review , I was not sure how JVM/JDK handles the signals > > that's why I installed my own signal handler. As you both pointed out, > > I removed the custom signal handler in NativeThread. > > > > Please find the latest > > webrev(http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~vtewari/8237858/webrev0.5/index.html) > > > where i have incorporated most of the review comments. > > > This iteration is still missing the formatting fixes to linux_close.c > and bsd_close.c. Also NativeSignal still has hardcoded values for the > signals. NativeThread.close signals, it doesn't close, so needs to be > renamed. I've skimmed through the updated SocketXXXInterruptTests but I > don't think they are ready for review yet, e.g. I would expect > SocketAcceptInterruptTest to test both timed and untimed accept. Also I > would expect the test would establish a connection so that it verifies > that a connection can be accept while until a barrage of signals. Also > the cleanup is not clear, it looks like it seems the Server thread > behind (this may be masked by running it with /othervm). > > -Alan > -- Thanks, Vyom
