RFR 8208715: Conversion of milliseconds to nanoseconds in UNIXProcess contains bug (original) (raw)

Martin Buchholz martinrb at google.com
Tue Aug 14 14:47:34 UTC 2018

hi Roger,

509 if (deadline <= 0) { 510 deadline = Long.MAX_VALUE; 511 }

This must be wrong. Nanotime wraparound is normal in this sort of code.

We ought to be able to delegate the fiddling with nanos to TimeUnit.timedWait.

Does it work to simply call NANOSECONDS.timedWait(remainingNanos) ? If not, is there a bug in TimeUnit.timedWait?

It's good to add a test for this. I've tried hard in similar tests to avoid sleep and to add variants where the target thread is interrupted before and after starting to wait. Testing pre-interrupt is easy - the thread can interrupt itself. BlockingQueueTest.testTimedPollWithOffer is an example.

On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 7:00 AM, Roger Riggs <Roger.Riggs at oracle.com> wrote:

Please review a fix for Process.waitFor(Long.MAXVALUE,MILLIS). Catch wrap around in very large wait times and saturate at Long.MAXVALUE.

Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rriggs/webrev-timeout-8208715/ Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8208715 Thanks, Roger

More information about the core-libs-dev mailing list