Skip to content

8353683: [REDO] j.u.l.Handler classes create deadlock risk via synchronized publish() method #24504

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Closed

Conversation

david-beaumont
Copy link
Contributor

@david-beaumont david-beaumont commented Apr 8, 2025

8353683: j.u.l.Handler classes create deadlock risk via synchronized publish() method.

  1. Remove synchronization of calls to publish() in Handlers in java.util.logging package.
  2. Add explanatory comments to various affected methods.
  3. Add a test to ensure deadlocks no longer occur.

Note that this change does not address issue in MemoryHandler (see JDK-8349208).


Progress

  • Change must be properly reviewed (1 review required, with at least 1 Reviewer)
  • Change requires CSR request JDK-8349920 to be approved
  • Change must not contain extraneous whitespace
  • Commit message must refer to an issue

Issues

  • JDK-8353683: [REDO] j.u.l.Handler classes create deadlock risk via synchronized publish() method (Bug - P4)
  • JDK-8349920: j.u.l.Handler classes create deadlock risk via synchronized publish() method (CSR)

Reviewers

Reviewing

Using git

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/24504/head:pull/24504
$ git checkout pull/24504

Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/24504
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/24504/head

Using Skara CLI tools

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 24504

View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 24504

Using diff file

Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/24504.diff

Using Webrev

Link to Webrev Comment

@bridgekeeper
Copy link

bridgekeeper bot commented Apr 8, 2025

👋 Welcome back david-beaumont! A progress list of the required criteria for merging this PR into master will be added to the body of your pull request. There are additional pull request commands available for use with this pull request.

@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Apr 8, 2025

@david-beaumont This change now passes all automated pre-integration checks.

ℹ️ This project also has non-automated pre-integration requirements. Please see the file CONTRIBUTING.md for details.

After integration, the commit message for the final commit will be:

8353683: [REDO] j.u.l.Handler classes create deadlock risk via synchronized publish() method

Reviewed-by: smarks

You can use pull request commands such as /summary, /contributor and /issue to adjust it as needed.

At the time when this comment was updated there had been 140 new commits pushed to the master branch:

As there are no conflicts, your changes will automatically be rebased on top of these commits when integrating. If you prefer to avoid this automatic rebasing, please check the documentation for the /integrate command for further details.

As you do not have Committer status in this project an existing Committer must agree to sponsor your change. Possible candidates are the reviewers of this PR (@stuart-marks) but any other Committer may sponsor as well.

➡️ To flag this PR as ready for integration with the above commit message, type /integrate in a new comment. (Afterwards, your sponsor types /sponsor in a new comment to perform the integration).

@openjdk openjdk bot added the rfr Pull request is ready for review label Apr 8, 2025
@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Apr 8, 2025

@david-beaumont The following label will be automatically applied to this pull request:

  • core-libs

When this pull request is ready to be reviewed, an "RFR" email will be sent to the corresponding mailing list. If you would like to change these labels, use the /label pull request command.

@david-beaumont
Copy link
Contributor Author

This is a redo of #23491 with a tiny additional edit to remove an unwanted <p> element in the public JavaDoc (see 772a03e ).

@mlbridge
Copy link

mlbridge bot commented Apr 8, 2025

Webrevs

@liach
Copy link
Member

liach commented Apr 9, 2025

@stuart-marks Can you check this out?

Copy link
Member

@stuart-marks stuart-marks left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good. I'll suggest that @dfuch sponsor this time. :-D

@openjdk openjdk bot added the ready Pull request is ready to be integrated label Apr 9, 2025
@dfuch
Copy link
Member

dfuch commented Apr 10, 2025

OK I ran tier1 and tier2 + logging test and got no failures. @david-beaumont can you integrate and let me know?

@david-beaumont
Copy link
Contributor Author

/integrate

@openjdk openjdk bot added the sponsor Pull request is ready to be sponsored label Apr 10, 2025
@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Apr 10, 2025

@david-beaumont
Your change (at version 772a03e) is now ready to be sponsored by a Committer.

@dfuch
Copy link
Member

dfuch commented Apr 10, 2025

/sponsor

@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Apr 10, 2025

Going to push as commit 36e11b6.
Since your change was applied there have been 140 commits pushed to the master branch:

Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts.

@openjdk openjdk bot added the integrated Pull request has been integrated label Apr 10, 2025
@openjdk openjdk bot closed this Apr 10, 2025
@openjdk openjdk bot removed ready Pull request is ready to be integrated rfr Pull request is ready for review sponsor Pull request is ready to be sponsored labels Apr 10, 2025
@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Apr 10, 2025

@dfuch @david-beaumont Pushed as commit 36e11b6.

💡 You may see a message that your pull request was closed with unmerged commits. This can be safely ignored.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
core-libs [email protected] integrated Pull request has been integrated
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants