Dmitry Samersoff said the following on 05/17/11 22:03:
I'd also stopped my eyes on this line but actually this race changes
nothing in Logger behavior - setupResourceInfo just replace previous
assignment.
Yes but it isn't supposed to do that if the resource bundle is
different, it is supposed to throw IllegalArgumentException.
As far as I understand Logger object could be collected out between
two getLogger() calls so nobody can be sure that assigned
resourceBundleName will be returned.
Don't quite understand what you are saying here. If you call getLogger(
"A", "foo") then you get back a logger for A with resource bundle for
Foo. If you drop that strong reference and call getLogger again then you
may get a different logger but that's not relevant to the race condition.
So no reason to worry about this race right now.
As already discussed the race is only harmful to code that would expect
to throw the IllegalArgumentException.
David
-Dmitry
On 2011-05-17 06:00, David Holmes wrote:
Dan,
I'm sorry this didn't come through in time ...
Mandy Chung said the following on 05/17/11 05:22:
Logger.java
Looks good. The removal of the synchronization required by
Logger.getLogger fixes the deadlock issue.
But this method now has a race condition:
372 // Synchronization is not required here. All synchronization for
373 // adding a new Logger object is handled by LogManager.addLogger().
374 public static Logger getLogger(String name, String
resourceBundleName) {
375 LogManager manager = LogManager.getLogManager();
376 Logger result = manager.demandLogger(name);
377 if (result.resourceBundleName == null) {
378 // Note: we may get a MissingResourceException here.
379 result.setupResourceInfo(resourceBundleName);
380 } else if (!result.resourceBundleName.equals(resourceBundleName)) {
381 throw new IllegalArgumentException(result.resourceBundleName +
382 " != " + resourceBundleName);
383 }
384 return result;
385 }
Two threads calling this method with the same name but different
resource bundle names can both see null at line 377 and install their
different resource bundles. That section needs to be atomic.
David
-----
LogManager.java
Retrying in a while loop is one way to fix weak ref / gc timing issue.
What about if you refactor the addLogger method to add a new private
private method equivalent to addLogger (say add(Logger)) that will
return
logger if added successfully or null if not.
The addLogger method will return add(logger) != logger. The
synchronization
will be done in the new add method.
Would this fix 7016208? It seems to me that addLogger returning boolean
is the cause for this bug.
Mandy
On 05/15/11 11:40, Daniel D. Daugherty wrote:
Greetings,
The final pre-ZBB JDK7-TL snapshot is happening @ 1700 PT on
Monday, May 14, 2011. This snapshot is targeted for JDK7-B143
or JDK7-B144 (I'm not sure which). Yes, we're still trying to
figure out how to merge our JDK & HotSpot Express processes
with Oracle processes. Please be patient while we iron out the
wrinkles...
I have three bug fixes for the java.util.logging area:
6977677 3/2 Deadlock on logging subsystem initialization
7016208 4/3 null sometimes returned by java.util.logging.Logger.
getLogger(String name) in -server -Xcomp
7041595 4/4 add lost test for 6487638
6977677 is a deadlock between java.util.logging.Logger.getLogger()
and LogManager.<clinit> via a PlatformLogger. This fix involves:
src/share/classes/java/util/logging/Logger.java
test/java/util/logging/LoggingDeadlock4.java
Mandy, I would like your review of the above bug fix.
7016208 is an unexpected null return from Logger.getLogger() due to
the lack of a strong reference. This fix involves:
src/share/classes/java/util/logging/LogManager.java
Tom R., I would like your review of the above bug fix.
7041595 is just pushing a Logging deadlock test that got lost a
long time ago. This fix involves:
test/java/util/logging/LoggingDeadlock3.java
test/java/util/logging/LoggingDeadlock3.props
Because I'm fixing a deadlock in 6977677, I wanted to make sure
that this Logging deadlock test was back in the mix.
Here is the webrev URL:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dcubed/logging-batch-20110515-webrev/0/
The comments that I added to the code changes should make the
reason(s) for the code changes pretty self explanatory.
These changes have been run through JPRT and pass the "jdk_util"
tests on all platforms. I have also run SDK/JDK logging tests
and the VM/NSK logging tests on the following configs:
Solaris X86 * {Client VM, Server VM} product * {-Xmixed, -Xcomp}
WinXP * {Client VM, Server VM} product * {-Xmixed, -Xcomp}
Here is the summary from Solaris X86:
Summary of Test Results (8 result dirs)
=========================================
all executed: 2264 all passed: 2264 all ignored: 0 all failed: 0
time: 0 hour(s) 17 minute(s)
Here is the partial summary (6 of 8) from WinXP:
Summary of Test Results (6 result dirs)
=========================================
all executed: 1160 all passed: 1160 all ignored: 0 all failed: 0
time: 1 hour(s) 0 minute(s)
The last two VM/NSK test runs are still going; yes, WinXP is slower
than
Solaris X86...
Thanks, in advance, for any reviews.
Dan
