8349988: Change cgroup version detection logic to not depend on /proc/cgroups

[jmtd]

Note: this adapts the 11u backport which (at the time of writing) is not yet approved.

This is a backport of an improvement to cgroup detection logic. This fixes mis-detection on some systems e.g. Debian and Ubuntu systems, or systems running a recent enough mainline kernel which no longer propagates the older /proc/cgroups file with necessary controllers.

This wasn't clean: there are a few C++ changes (nullptr to NULL substitutions, os namespacing on cstd functions); logging mechanism changes; removal of PID controller related stuff.

Cherry-picking note: for reasons unknown git failed to apply the hunks for whitebox.cpp so I did those manually. It also patched the wrong copy of WhiteBox.java. I'm hoping we can pick up JDK-8327993 which should resolve this for future cgroups backports.

The modified CgroupSubsystemFactory.java passes.

---

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
• JDK-8347811 needs maintainer approval
• JDK-8349988 needs maintainer approval

Issues

• JDK-8349988: Change cgroup version detection logic to not depend on /proc/cgroups (Sub-task - P3)
• JDK-8347811: Container detection code for cgroups v2 should use cgroup.controllers (Enhancement - P3)

Reviewing

Using git

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk8u-dev.git pull/779/head:pull/779
$ git checkout pull/779

Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/779
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.org/jdk8u-dev.git pull/779/head

Using Skara CLI tools

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 779

View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 779

Using diff file

Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.org/jdk8u-dev/pull/779.diff

[bridgekeeper]

👋 Welcome back jdowland! 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]

❗ This change is not yet ready to be integrated.
See the Progress checklist in the description for automated requirements.

[openjdk]

⚠️ @jmtd the commit 59c7c8ed4b3392d3c8ee26128aaa71d10f46a595 does not refer to an issue in project JDK.

[openjdk]

This backport pull request has now been updated with issues from the original commit.

[jmtd]

# newfailures.txt
security/infra/java/security/cert/CertPathValidator/certification/CAInterop.java#digicerttlseccrootg5 
security/infra/java/security/cert/CertPathValidator/certification/CAInterop.java#digicerttlsrsarootg5 
security/infra/java/security/cert/CertPathValidator/certification/CAInterop.java#quovadisrootca1g3 
security/infra/java/security/cert/CertPathValidator/certification/CAInterop.java#quovadisrootca2g3 
security/infra/java/security/cert/CertPathValidator/certification/CAInterop.java#quovadisrootca3g3 
security/infra/java/security/cert/CertPathValidator/certification/CAInterop.java#teliarootcav2 

gut feeling is these will be unrelated but I will investigate further.

[jmtd]

reproduced those failures locally. now trying the master branch. Edit: yes same failures

[gnu-andrew]

# newfailures.txt
security/infra/java/security/cert/CertPathValidator/certification/CAInterop.java#digicerttlseccrootg5 
security/infra/java/security/cert/CertPathValidator/certification/CAInterop.java#digicerttlsrsarootg5 
security/infra/java/security/cert/CertPathValidator/certification/CAInterop.java#quovadisrootca1g3 
security/infra/java/security/cert/CertPathValidator/certification/CAInterop.java#quovadisrootca2g3 
security/infra/java/security/cert/CertPathValidator/certification/CAInterop.java#quovadisrootca3g3 
security/infra/java/security/cert/CertPathValidator/certification/CAInterop.java#teliarootcav2 

gut feeling is these will be unrelated but I will investigate further.

They are.

I haven't looked at this one in detail yet, but I would wait until the 11u one is in, as I did spot a few issues with that one.