Skip to content

Conversation

mahendrachhipa
Copy link
Member

@mahendrachhipa mahendrachhipa commented Oct 2, 2025

Update SimpleHttpServer class to use SimpleFileServer.


Progress

  • Change must be properly reviewed (1 review required, with at least 1 Reviewer)
  • Change must not contain extraneous whitespace
  • Commit message must refer to an issue

Issue

  • JDK-8367114: Update jdk.test.lib.net.SimpleHttpServer to use SimpleFileServer (Enhancement - P4)

Reviewers

Reviewing

Using git

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/27608/head:pull/27608
$ git checkout pull/27608

Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/27608
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/27608/head

Using Skara CLI tools

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 27608

View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 27608

Using diff file

Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/27608.diff

Using Webrev

Link to Webrev Comment

@bridgekeeper
Copy link

bridgekeeper bot commented Oct 2, 2025

👋 Welcome back mchhipa! 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 Oct 2, 2025

@mahendrachhipa 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:

8367114: Update jdk.test.lib.net.SimpleHttpServer to use SimpleFileServer

Reviewed-by: dfuchs, vyazici

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 41 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.

➡️ To integrate this PR with the above commit message to the master branch, type /integrate in a new comment.

@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Oct 2, 2025

@mahendrachhipa The following label will be automatically applied to this pull request:

  • net

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.

@mahendrachhipa
Copy link
Member Author

Hi @JoeWang-Java , @dfuch , Could you please review this PR.

@openjdk openjdk bot changed the title JDK-8367114: Update jdk.test.lib.net.SimpleHttpServer to use SimpleFileServer 8367114: Update jdk.test.lib.net.SimpleHttpServer to use SimpleFileServer Oct 2, 2025
@openjdk openjdk bot added the rfr Pull request is ready for review label Oct 2, 2025
@mlbridge
Copy link

mlbridge bot commented Oct 2, 2025

Webrevs

Copy link
Contributor

@vy vy left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Nice clean up, thanks @mahendrachhipa! 💯
I see that Tier1-3 pass, LGTM.

Copy link
Member

@jaikiran jaikiran left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Hello Mahendra, it's good that we are moving to use the com.sun.net.httpserver.SimpleFileServer in this test library class. However, it looks like before this change, this test library class was using a Executor which allowed it to handle multiple requests concurrently and thus serve the files concurrently. With this change, the requests will now be handled serially because the lack of any executor being configured on the internal HttpServer instance backing the SimpleFileServer instance.

Looking at the references of this jdk.test.lib.net.SimpleHttpServer test library class, I see only 3 tests using it. I wonder if we should just delete this class altogether and instead using the the SimpleFileServer at the call sites as and how necessary.

@jaikiran
Copy link
Member

jaikiran commented Oct 3, 2025

Interestingly, there's even a test/jdk/com/sun/net/httpserver/SimpleFileServer.java class which is neither a test nor a test library class. As far as I can see, it's not being used anywhere. Maybe we should remove that one too. These similarly named classes add to confusion.

@dfuch
Copy link
Member

dfuch commented Oct 3, 2025

The SimpleHttpServer class that Mahendra is updating is used by multi-relase jars and jaxp catalog tests. It could be prudent to update the class first, check that everything remains stable, and then replace usage in a followup issue.
It seems this class is only being used by three tests however - so maybe updating those three tests to use the SimpleFileServer directly won't be too bad.
If we do that then make sure we keep the same behaviour = keep the executor as @jaikiran suggested.

Good find about test/jdk/com/sun/net/httpserver/SimpleFileServer.java - let's attempt to remove it - it does not appear to be used anywhere.

@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Oct 3, 2025

@mahendrachhipa core-libs has been added to this pull request based on files touched in new commit(s).

@mahendrachhipa
Copy link
Member Author

Hello Mahendra, it's good that we are moving to use the com.sun.net.httpserver.SimpleFileServer in this test library class. However, it looks like before this change, this test library class was using a Executor which allowed it to handle multiple requests concurrently and thus serve the files concurrently. With this change, the requests will now be handled serially because the lack of any executor being configured on the internal HttpServer instance backing the SimpleFileServer instance.

Looking at the references of this jdk.test.lib.net.SimpleHttpServer test library class, I see only 3 tests using it. I wonder if we should just delete this class altogether and instead using the the SimpleFileServer at the call sites as and how necessary.

Thanks. Now SimpleFileServer is being used in tests and jdk.test.lib.net.SimpleHttpServer is deleted now.

@mahendrachhipa
Copy link
Member Author

/open

@mahendrachhipa mahendrachhipa reopened this Oct 3, 2025
@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Oct 3, 2025

@mahendrachhipa This pull request is now open

@mahendrachhipa
Copy link
Member Author

The SimpleHttpServer class that Mahendra is updating is used by multi-relase jars and jaxp catalog tests. It could be prudent to update the class first, check that everything remains stable, and then replace usage in a followup issue. It seems this class is only being used by three tests however - so maybe updating those three tests to use the SimpleFileServer directly won't be too bad. If we do that then make sure we keep the same behaviour = keep the executor as @jaikiran suggested.

Good find about test/jdk/com/sun/net/httpserver/SimpleFileServer.java - let's attempt to remove it - it does not appear to be used anywhere.

Thanks, Now test/jdk/com/sun/net/httpserver/SimpleFileServer.java is removed.

@openjdk openjdk bot added the ready Pull request is ready to be integrated label Oct 6, 2025
@mahendrachhipa
Copy link
Member Author

/integrate

@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Oct 6, 2025

Going to push as commit b6a4cfe.
Since your change was applied there have been 41 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 Oct 6, 2025
@openjdk openjdk bot closed this Oct 6, 2025
@openjdk openjdk bot removed ready Pull request is ready to be integrated rfr Pull request is ready for review labels Oct 6, 2025
@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Oct 6, 2025

@mahendrachhipa Pushed as commit b6a4cfe.

💡 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
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants