RFR: 8332922: Test java/io/IO/IO.java fails when /usr/bin/expect not exist
Hi all, When there is no `/usr/bin/expect` in system, `throw new SkippedException` will not make the jvm exit in `@BeforeAll` junit stage, thus this will cause this testcase run failed. So I make change from `throw new SkippedException` to `System.exit` to avoid this issue. When use `System.exit`, I think we should use `othervm` mode in jtreg. Only change the testcase, the risk is low. Thanks. - Commit messages: - 8332922: Test java/io/IO/IO.java fails when /usr/bin/expect not exist Changes: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19403/files Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=19403&range=00 Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8332922 Stats: 4 lines in 1 file changed: 2 ins; 0 del; 2 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19403.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/19403/head:pull/19403 PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19403
Re: RFR: 8332922: Test java/io/IO/IO.java fails when /usr/bin/expect not exist [v2]
On Sun, 26 May 2024 06:16:44 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
>> test/jdk/java/io/IO/IO.java line 64:
>>
>>> 62: expect = Paths.get("/usr/bin/expect"); // os-specific path
>>> 63: if (!Files.exists(expect) || !Files.isExecutable(expect)) {
>>> 64: System.out.println("jtreg.SkippedException: '" + expect
>>> + "' not found");
>>
>> SkippedException works with jtreg tests only. For jUnit you need to use
>> [Assumptions.abort](https://junit.org/junit5/docs/5.9.1/api/org.junit.jupiter.api/org/junit/jupiter/api/Assumptions.html#abort(java.lang.String))
>
>> SkippedException works with jtreg tests only. For jUnit you need to use
>> [Assumptions.abort](https://junit.org/junit5/docs/5.9.1/api/org.junit.jupiter.api/org/junit/jupiter/api/Assumptions.html#abort(java.lang.String))
>
> Yes, the Assumptions API should be used here. We use that in several JUnit
> tests that skip when tests when they can't run and you want it to fail the
> test.
Thanks for the review and suggest. The code has been updated according the
suggest. Thanks.
-
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19403#discussion_r1615075147
Re: RFR: 8332922: Test java/io/IO/IO.java fails when /usr/bin/expect not exist [v2]
> Hi all, > When there is no `/usr/bin/expect` in system, `throw new SkippedException` > will not make the jvm exit in `@BeforeAll` junit stage, thus this will cause > this testcase run failed. So I make change from `throw new SkippedException` > to `System.exit` to avoid this issue. When use `System.exit`, I think we > should use `othervm` mode in jtreg. > Only change the testcase, the risk is low. > > Thanks. SendaoYan has updated the pull request incrementally with two additional commits since the last revision: - delete "static final int JCK_STATUS_BASE = 95;" Signed-off-by: sendaoYan - 8332922: Test java/io/IO/IO.java fails when /usr/bin/expect not exist Signed-off-by: sendaoYan - Changes: - all: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19403/files - new: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19403/files/90fa1e13..57b4dee5 Webrevs: - full: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=19403&range=01 - incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=19403&range=00-01 Stats: 5 lines in 1 file changed: 0 ins; 2 del; 3 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19403.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/19403/head:pull/19403 PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19403
Re: RFR: 8332922: Test java/io/IO/IO.java fails when /usr/bin/expect not exist [v2]
On Sun, 26 May 2024 07:40:38 GMT, Daniel Jeliński wrote: > LGTM. I assume you verified it does the right thing. Thanks for the review and approved. The change has been verified. - PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19403#issuecomment-2132120584
Integrated: 8332922: Test java/io/IO/IO.java fails when /usr/bin/expect not exist
On Sun, 26 May 2024 02:58:02 GMT, SendaoYan wrote: > Hi all, > When there is no `/usr/bin/expect` in system, `throw new SkippedException` > will not make the jvm exit in `@BeforeAll` junit stage, thus this will cause > this testcase run failed. So I make change from `throw new SkippedException` > to `Assumptions.abort` to avoid this issue. > Only change the testcase, no risk. > > Thanks. This pull request has now been integrated. Changeset: 4e8deb39 Author:SendaoYan Committer: Daniel Jeliński URL: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/commit/4e8deb396e38c69de22b6348dca637d814d73aef Stats: 2 lines in 1 file changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 2 mod 8332922: Test java/io/IO/IO.java fails when /usr/bin/expect not exist Reviewed-by: djelinski - PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19403
Re: RFR: 8332922: Test java/io/IO/IO.java fails when /usr/bin/expect not exist [v2]
On Sun, 26 May 2024 07:24:16 GMT, SendaoYan wrote: >> Hi all, >> When there is no `/usr/bin/expect` in system, `throw new SkippedException` >> will not make the jvm exit in `@BeforeAll` junit stage, thus this will cause >> this testcase run failed. So I make change from `throw new SkippedException` >> to `Assumptions.abort` to avoid this issue. >> Only change the testcase, no risk. >> >> Thanks. > > SendaoYan has updated the pull request incrementally with two additional > commits since the last revision: > > - delete "static final int JCK_STATUS_BASE = 95;" > >Signed-off-by: sendaoYan > - 8332922: Test java/io/IO/IO.java fails when /usr/bin/expect not exist > >Signed-off-by: sendaoYan > /sponsor Thanks. - PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19403#issuecomment-2132757338
RFR: 8333477: Delete extra empty spaces in Makefiles
Hi all, This PR several extra empty spaces and extra empty lines in several Makefiles. It's trivial fix, no risk. Thanks. - Commit messages: - 8333477: Delete extra empty spaces in Makefiles Changes: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19537/files Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=19537&range=00 Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8333477 Stats: 9 lines in 4 files changed: 0 ins; 1 del; 8 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19537.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/19537/head:pull/19537 PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19537
Re: RFR: 8333477: Delete extra empty spaces in Makefiles
On Tue, 4 Jun 2024 07:47:46 GMT, SendaoYan wrote: > Hi all, > This PR several extra empty spaces and extra empty lines in several > Makefiles. It's trivial fix, no risk. > > Thanks. > /label build Thanks. - PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19537#issuecomment-2147467980
Re: RFR: 8333477: Delete extra empty spaces in Makefiles
On Tue, 4 Jun 2024 07:47:46 GMT, SendaoYan wrote: > Hi all, > This PR several extra empty spaces and extra empty lines in several > Makefiles. It's trivial fix, no risk. > > Thanks. Thanks for the review. Thanks all for the review. - PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19537#issuecomment-2147523325 PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19537#issuecomment-2147711173
Re: RFR: 8333477: Delete extra empty spaces in Makefiles [v2]
> Hi all, > This PR several extra empty spaces and extra empty lines in several > Makefiles. It's trivial fix, no risk. > > Thanks. SendaoYan has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision: delete extra empty trailing blank line in test/jdk/java/rmi/reliability/benchmark/bench/Makefile - Changes: - all: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19537/files - new: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19537/files/0d2be363..e80b98da Webrevs: - full: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=19537&range=01 - incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=19537&range=00-01 Stats: 2 lines in 1 file changed: 0 ins; 1 del; 1 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19537.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/19537/head:pull/19537 PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19537
Re: RFR: 8333477: Delete extra empty spaces in Makefiles [v2]
On Thu, 6 Jun 2024 17:49:08 GMT, Chen Liang wrote: >> SendaoYan has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional >> commit since the last revision: >> >> delete extra empty trailing blank line in >> test/jdk/java/rmi/reliability/benchmark/bench/Makefile > > test/jdk/java/rmi/reliability/benchmark/bench/rmi/Makefile line 1: > >> 1: # > > This file change is dubious: > 1. It does not have any trailing whitespace that can fail the skara checks. > 2. If the duplicate blank lines in the end of this Makefile is indeed > problematic (as fixed here), please fix the only other occasion in the JDK, > which is the Makefile in the parent directory. (Checked with `\n$^\n$\Z` > pattern in all Makefiles) > > Recommended actions: Either > 1. Revert changes in this file; > 2. Also update `test/jdk/java/rmi/reliability/benchmark/bench/Makefile` to > remove the trailing blank line. Thanks for the suggestion, the trailing blank line of `test/jdk/java/rmi/reliability/benchmark/bench/Makefile` has been removed. - PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19537#discussion_r1630767547
Re: RFR: 8333477: Delete extra empty spaces in Makefiles [v2]
On Fri, 7 Jun 2024 07:29:39 GMT, SendaoYan wrote: >> Hi all, >> This PR several extra empty spaces and extra empty lines in several >> Makefiles. It's trivial fix, no risk. >> >> Thanks. > > SendaoYan has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional > commit since the last revision: > > delete extra empty trailing blank line in > test/jdk/java/rmi/reliability/benchmark/bench/Makefile Thanks all for the review. - PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19537#issuecomment-2154735598
Re: RFR: 8333477: Delete extra empty spaces in Makefiles [v2]
On Fri, 7 Jun 2024 12:53:46 GMT, Chen Liang wrote: >> No, it's an extra newline. A file should end with a newline but one is >> enough. > > As confusing as they are, unfortunately GitHub UI does not render extra > trailing newlines. This is the only one I could find with grepWin. I find the extra trailing newlines through below shell command: for i in `find . -iname "Makefile*" | sed "/./build/d"` ; do tail -n 2 $i | grep -c "^$" | grep -q "^1$" ; if [[ 0 -eq $? ]] ; then echo $i ; fi ; done There are only two files has been found: ./test/jdk/java/rmi/reliability/benchmark/bench/rmi/Makefile ./test/jdk/java/rmi/reliability/benchmark/bench/Makefile - PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19537#discussion_r1631168243
Integrated: 8333477: Delete extra empty spaces in Makefiles
On Tue, 4 Jun 2024 07:47:46 GMT, SendaoYan wrote: > Hi all, > This PR several extra empty spaces and extra empty lines in several > Makefiles. It's trivial fix, no risk. > > Thanks. This pull request has now been integrated. Changeset: d130d2f4 Author:SendaoYan Committer: Julian Waters URL: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/commit/d130d2f4f46d37a2b924343de19d012c129b0a55 Stats: 11 lines in 5 files changed: 0 ins; 2 del; 9 mod 8333477: Delete extra empty spaces in Makefiles Reviewed-by: erikj, chagedorn, liach, jwaters - PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19537
Re: RFR: 8333477: Delete extra empty spaces in Makefiles [v2]
On Fri, 7 Jun 2024 07:29:39 GMT, SendaoYan wrote: >> Hi all, >> This PR several extra empty spaces and extra empty lines in several >> Makefiles. It's trivial fix, no risk. >> >> Thanks. > > SendaoYan has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional > commit since the last revision: > > delete extra empty trailing blank line in > test/jdk/java/rmi/reliability/benchmark/bench/Makefile Thanks all for the review and sponsor. - PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19537#issuecomment-2154937099
RFR: 8334057: JLinkReproducibleTest.java support receive test.tool.vm.opts
Hi all, Currently, the testcase `test/jdk/tools/jlink/JLinkReproducibleTest.java` doesn't receive jvm options from jtreg. I think it's necessory to receive jvm options from jtreg. The change has been verified, only change the testacase, the risk is low. - Commit messages: - 8334057: JLinkReproducibleTest.java support receive test.tool.vm.opts Changes: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19669/files Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=19669&range=00 Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8334057 Stats: 7 lines in 1 file changed: 6 ins; 0 del; 1 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19669.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/19669/head:pull/19669 PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19669
RFR: 8334333: Run test MissingResourceCauseTestRun.java with root user fails
Hi all, Testcase `test/jdk/java/util/ResourceBundle/Control/MissingResourceCauseTestRun.java` run fails with root user privileged. I think it's necessary to skip this testcase when user is root. The change has been verified, only change the testcase, no risk. - Commit messages: - 8334333: Run test MissingResourceCauseTestRun.java with root user fails Changes: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19732/files Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=19732&range=00 Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8334333 Stats: 7 lines in 1 file changed: 6 ins; 0 del; 1 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19732.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/19732/head:pull/19732 PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19732
Re: RFR: 8334333: MissingResourceCauseTestRun.java fails if run by root [v2]
> Hi all, > Testcase > `test/jdk/java/util/ResourceBundle/Control/MissingResourceCauseTestRun.java` > run fails with root user privileged. I think it's necessary to skip this > testcase when user is root. > Why run the jtreg test by root user? It's because during rpmbuild process for > linux distribution of JDK, root user is the default user to build the > openjdk, also is the default user to run the `make test-tier1`, this PR make > this testcase more robustness. > The change has been verified, only change the testcase, no risk. SendaoYan has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision: change the excption meassges to: Unable to create an unreadable properties file - Changes: - all: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19732/files - new: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19732/files/5cf26a11..9b8a0bcb Webrevs: - full: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=19732&range=01 - incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=19732&range=00-01 Stats: 1 line in 1 file changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 1 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19732.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/19732/head:pull/19732 PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19732
Re: RFR: 8334333: MissingResourceCauseTestRun.java fails if run by root [v2]
On Mon, 17 Jun 2024 18:46:34 GMT, Naoto Sato wrote:
>> SendaoYan has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> change the excption meassges to: Unable to create an unreadable properties
>> file
>
> test/jdk/java/util/ResourceBundle/Control/MissingResourceCauseTestRun.java
> line 60:
>
>> 58: public static void main(String[] args) throws Throwable {
>> 59: if(Platform.isRoot() && !Platform.isWindows()) {
>> 60: throw new SkippedException("root user has privileged will
>> make this test fail.");
>
> The exception message can be improved. How about "Unable to create an
> unreadable properties file"?
Thanks for the suggestion. The exception message has been change.
-
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19732#discussion_r1643627352
Re: RFR: 8334333: MissingResourceCauseTestRun.java fails if run by root [v2]
On Tue, 18 Jun 2024 06:18:48 GMT, Andrey Turbanov wrote:
>> SendaoYan has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> change the excption meassges to: Unable to create an unreadable properties
>> file
>
> test/jdk/java/util/ResourceBundle/Control/MissingResourceCauseTestRun.java
> line 59:
>
>> 57: public class MissingResourceCauseTestRun {
>> 58: public static void main(String[] args) throws Throwable {
>> 59: if(Platform.isRoot() && !Platform.isWindows()) {
>
> Suggestion:
>
> if (Platform.isRoot() && !Platform.isWindows()) {
Thanks for the review. A white space before `if` has been added.
-
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19732#discussion_r1643892712
Re: RFR: 8334333: MissingResourceCauseTestRun.java fails if run by root [v3]
> Hi all, > Testcase > `test/jdk/java/util/ResourceBundle/Control/MissingResourceCauseTestRun.java` > run fails with root user privileged. I think it's necessary to skip this > testcase when user is root. > Why run the jtreg test by root user? It's because during rpmbuild process for > linux distribution of JDK, root user is the default user to build the > openjdk, also is the default user to run the `make test-tier1`, this PR make > this testcase more robustness. > The change has been verified, only change the testcase, no risk. SendaoYan has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision: add a whitespace before if - Changes: - all: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19732/files - new: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19732/files/9b8a0bcb..90d3b335 Webrevs: - full: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=19732&range=02 - incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=19732&range=01-02 Stats: 2 lines in 1 file changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 2 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19732.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/19732/head:pull/19732 PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19732
Re: RFR: 8334333: MissingResourceCauseTestRun.java fails if run by root [v4]
> Hi all, > Testcase > `test/jdk/java/util/ResourceBundle/Control/MissingResourceCauseTestRun.java` > run fails with root user privileged. I think it's necessary to skip this > testcase when user is root. > Why run the jtreg test by root user? It's because during rpmbuild process for > linux distribution of JDK, root user is the default user to build the > openjdk, also is the default user to run the `make test-tier1`, this PR make > this testcase more robustness. > The change has been verified, only change the testcase, no risk. SendaoYan has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision: add bug id 8334333 to jtreg tag @bug - Changes: - all: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19732/files - new: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19732/files/90d3b335..23f99429 Webrevs: - full: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=19732&range=03 - incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=19732&range=02-03 Stats: 1 line in 1 file changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 1 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19732.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/19732/head:pull/19732 PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19732
Re: RFR: 8334333: MissingResourceCauseTestRun.java fails if run by root [v3]
On Tue, 18 Jun 2024 07:31:59 GMT, Justin Lu wrote: >> SendaoYan has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional >> commit since the last revision: >> >> add a whitespace before if > > test/jdk/java/util/ResourceBundle/Control/MissingResourceCauseTestRun.java > line 54: > >> 52: import jdk.test.lib.Utils; >> 53: import jdk.test.lib.process.ProcessTools; >> 54: import jdk.test.lib.Platform; > > It would be beneficial to add this issue's bug ID to the Jtreg `@bug` tag. Thanks for the suggestion. The bug id `8334333` has been added. - PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19732#discussion_r1643982602
Re: RFR: 8334333: MissingResourceCauseTestRun.java fails if run by root [v4]
On Tue, 18 Jun 2024 07:41:35 GMT, SendaoYan wrote: >> Hi all, >> Testcase >> `test/jdk/java/util/ResourceBundle/Control/MissingResourceCauseTestRun.java` >> run fails with root user privileged. I think it's necessary to skip this >> testcase when user is root. >> Why run the jtreg test by root user? It's because during rpmbuild process >> for linux distribution of JDK, root user is the default user to build the >> openjdk, also is the default user to run the `make test-tier1`, this PR make >> this testcase more robustness. >> The change has been verified, only change the testcase, no risk. > > SendaoYan has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional > commit since the last revision: > > add bug id 8334333 to jtreg tag @bug Thanks all for the review. - PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19732#issuecomment-2177319690
Integrated: 8334333: MissingResourceCauseTestRun.java fails if run by root
On Sat, 15 Jun 2024 09:56:53 GMT, SendaoYan wrote: > Hi all, > Testcase > `test/jdk/java/util/ResourceBundle/Control/MissingResourceCauseTestRun.java` > run fails with root user privileged. I think it's necessary to skip this > testcase when user is root. > Why run the jtreg test by root user? It's because during rpmbuild process for > linux distribution of JDK, root user is the default user to build the > openjdk, also is the default user to run the `make test-tier1`, this PR make > this testcase more robustness. > The change has been verified, only change the testcase, no risk. This pull request has now been integrated. Changeset: de8ee977 Author:SendaoYan Committer: Naoto Sato URL: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/commit/de8ee97718d7e12b541b310cf5b67f3e10e91ad9 Stats: 9 lines in 1 file changed: 6 ins; 0 del; 3 mod 8334333: MissingResourceCauseTestRun.java fails if run by root Reviewed-by: naoto, jlu - PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19732
Re: RFR: 8334333: MissingResourceCauseTestRun.java fails if run by root [v4]
On Tue, 18 Jun 2024 07:41:35 GMT, SendaoYan wrote: >> Hi all, >> Testcase >> `test/jdk/java/util/ResourceBundle/Control/MissingResourceCauseTestRun.java` >> run fails with root user privileged. I think it's necessary to skip this >> testcase when user is root. >> Why run the jtreg test by root user? It's because during rpmbuild process >> for linux distribution of JDK, root user is the default user to build the >> openjdk, also is the default user to run the `make test-tier1`, this PR make >> this testcase more robustness. >> The change has been verified, only change the testcase, no risk. > > SendaoYan has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional > commit since the last revision: > > add bug id 8334333 to jtreg tag @bug Thanks for the sponsor. - PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19732#issuecomment-2181783165
[jdk23] RFR: 8334333: MissingResourceCauseTestRun.java fails if run by root
Hi all, This pull request contains a backport of commit [de8ee977](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/commit/de8ee97718d7e12b541b310cf5b67f3e10e91ad9) from the [openjdk/jdk](https://git.openjdk.org/jdk) repository. The commit being backported was authored by SendaoYan on 20 Jun 2024 and was reviewed by Naoto Sato and Justin Lu. Thanks! - Commit messages: - Backport de8ee97718d7e12b541b310cf5b67f3e10e91ad9 Changes: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19817/files Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=19817&range=00 Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8334333 Stats: 9 lines in 1 file changed: 6 ins; 0 del; 3 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19817.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/19817/head:pull/19817 PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19817
Re: [jdk23] RFR: 8334333: MissingResourceCauseTestRun.java fails if run by root
On Fri, 21 Jun 2024 00:49:33 GMT, SendaoYan wrote: > Hi all, > > This pull request contains a backport of commit > [de8ee977](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/commit/de8ee97718d7e12b541b310cf5b67f3e10e91ad9) > from the [openjdk/jdk](https://git.openjdk.org/jdk) repository. > > The commit being backported was authored by SendaoYan on 20 Jun 2024 and was > reviewed by Naoto Sato and Justin Lu. > > Thanks! Thanks for review. - PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19817#issuecomment-2183078007
Re: [jdk23] RFR: 8334333: MissingResourceCauseTestRun.java fails if run by root
On Fri, 21 Jun 2024 00:49:33 GMT, SendaoYan wrote: > Hi all, > > This pull request contains a backport of commit > [de8ee977](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/commit/de8ee97718d7e12b541b310cf5b67f3e10e91ad9) > from the [openjdk/jdk](https://git.openjdk.org/jdk) repository. > > The commit being backported was authored by SendaoYan on 20 Jun 2024 and was > reviewed by Naoto Sato and Justin Lu. > > Thanks! Thanks for the sponsor. - PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19817#issuecomment-2183087424
[jdk23] Integrated: 8334333: MissingResourceCauseTestRun.java fails if run by root
On Fri, 21 Jun 2024 00:49:33 GMT, SendaoYan wrote: > Hi all, > > This pull request contains a backport of commit > [de8ee977](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/commit/de8ee97718d7e12b541b310cf5b67f3e10e91ad9) > from the [openjdk/jdk](https://git.openjdk.org/jdk) repository. > > The commit being backported was authored by SendaoYan on 20 Jun 2024 and was > reviewed by Naoto Sato and Justin Lu. > > Thanks! This pull request has now been integrated. Changeset: 21514931 Author:SendaoYan Committer: Naoto Sato URL: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/commit/215149310c49b01dee671afde7ad2da47ee3b8e4 Stats: 9 lines in 1 file changed: 6 ins; 0 del; 3 mod 8334333: MissingResourceCauseTestRun.java fails if run by root Reviewed-by: naoto Backport-of: de8ee97718d7e12b541b310cf5b67f3e10e91ad9 - PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19817
[jdk23] RFR: 8334441: Mark tests in jdk_security_infra group as manual
Hi all, This pull request contains a backport of commit [8e1d2b09](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/commit/8e1d2b091c9a311d98a0b886a803fb18d4405d8a) from the [openjdk/jdk](https://git.openjdk.org/jdk) repository. The commit being backported was authored by Rajan Halade on 21 Jun 2024 and was reviewed by Christoph Langer and Sean Mullan. Thanks! - Commit messages: - Backport 8e1d2b091c9a311d98a0b886a803fb18d4405d8a Changes: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19841/files Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=19841&range=00 Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8334441 Stats: 160 lines in 10 files changed: 5 ins; 2 del; 153 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19841.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/19841/head:pull/19841 PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19841
Re: [jdk23] RFR: 8334441: Mark tests in jdk_security_infra group as manual
On Sat, 22 Jun 2024 08:07:54 GMT, SendaoYan wrote: > Hi all, > > This pull request contains a backport of commit > [8e1d2b09](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/commit/8e1d2b091c9a311d98a0b886a803fb18d4405d8a) > from the [openjdk/jdk](https://git.openjdk.org/jdk) repository. > > The commit being backported was authored by Rajan Halade on 21 Jun 2024 and > was reviewed by Christoph Langer and Sean Mullan. > > Thanks! Thanks for the review. - PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19841#issuecomment-2184269585
[jdk23] RFR: 8333358: java/io/IO/IO.java test fails intermittently
Hi all, This pull request contains a backport of commit [1b1dba80](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/commit/1b1dba8082969244effa86ac03c6053b3b0ddc43) from the [openjdk/jdk](https://git.openjdk.org/jdk) repository. The commit being backported was authored by Pavel Rappo on 20 Jun 2024 and was reviewed by Naoto Sato. Thanks! - Commit messages: - Backport 1b1dba8082969244effa86ac03c6053b3b0ddc43 Changes: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19847/files Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=19847&range=00 Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-858 Stats: 69 lines in 3 files changed: 63 ins; 2 del; 4 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19847.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/19847/head:pull/19847 PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19847
[jdk23] Integrated: 8334441: Mark tests in jdk_security_infra group as manual
On Sat, 22 Jun 2024 08:07:54 GMT, SendaoYan wrote: > Hi all, > > This pull request contains a backport of commit > [8e1d2b09](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/commit/8e1d2b091c9a311d98a0b886a803fb18d4405d8a) > from the [openjdk/jdk](https://git.openjdk.org/jdk) repository. > > The commit being backported was authored by Rajan Halade on 21 Jun 2024 and > was reviewed by Christoph Langer and Sean Mullan. > > Thanks! This pull request has now been integrated. Changeset: 10d81a33 Author:SendaoYan Committer: Chen Liang URL: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/commit/10d81a337d45d4ab05ffdbc722ffc7dd832f5c82 Stats: 160 lines in 10 files changed: 5 ins; 2 del; 153 mod 8334441: Mark tests in jdk_security_infra group as manual Reviewed-by: clanger Backport-of: 8e1d2b091c9a311d98a0b886a803fb18d4405d8a - PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19841
Re: [jdk23] RFR: 8334441: Mark tests in jdk_security_infra group as manual
On Sat, 22 Jun 2024 08:07:54 GMT, SendaoYan wrote: > Hi all, > > This pull request contains a backport of commit > [8e1d2b09](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/commit/8e1d2b091c9a311d98a0b886a803fb18d4405d8a) > from the [openjdk/jdk](https://git.openjdk.org/jdk) repository. > > The commit being backported was authored by Rajan Halade on 21 Jun 2024 and > was reviewed by Christoph Langer and Sean Mullan. > > Thanks! Thanks for the sponsor. - PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19841#issuecomment-2185391474
Re: [jdk23] RFR: 8333358: java/io/IO/IO.java test fails intermittently
On Sun, 23 Jun 2024 15:11:52 GMT, SendaoYan wrote: > Hi all, > > This pull request contains a backport of commit > [1b1dba80](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/commit/1b1dba8082969244effa86ac03c6053b3b0ddc43) > from the [openjdk/jdk](https://git.openjdk.org/jdk) repository. > > The commit being backported was authored by Pavel Rappo on 20 Jun 2024 and > was reviewed by Naoto Sato. > > Thanks! Thanks for the review. - PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19847#issuecomment-2186073017
[jdk23] Integrated: 8333358: java/io/IO/IO.java test fails intermittently
On Sun, 23 Jun 2024 15:11:52 GMT, SendaoYan wrote: > Hi all, > > This pull request contains a backport of commit > [1b1dba80](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/commit/1b1dba8082969244effa86ac03c6053b3b0ddc43) > from the [openjdk/jdk](https://git.openjdk.org/jdk) repository. > > The commit being backported was authored by Pavel Rappo on 20 Jun 2024 and > was reviewed by Naoto Sato. > > Thanks! This pull request has now been integrated. Changeset: bd66b6b6 Author:SendaoYan Committer: Pavel Rappo URL: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/commit/bd66b6b6f9bb0b415b686f06231ccd85dab459da Stats: 69 lines in 3 files changed: 63 ins; 2 del; 4 mod 858: java/io/IO/IO.java test fails intermittently Reviewed-by: prappo Backport-of: 1b1dba8082969244effa86ac03c6053b3b0ddc43 - PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19847
Re: [jdk23] RFR: 8333358: java/io/IO/IO.java test fails intermittently
On Sun, 23 Jun 2024 15:11:52 GMT, SendaoYan wrote: > Hi all, > > This pull request contains a backport of commit > [1b1dba80](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/commit/1b1dba8082969244effa86ac03c6053b3b0ddc43) > from the [openjdk/jdk](https://git.openjdk.org/jdk) repository. > > The commit being backported was authored by Pavel Rappo on 20 Jun 2024 and > was reviewed by Naoto Sato. > > Thanks! Thansk for the sponsor. - PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19847#issuecomment-2186097277
RFR: 8334771: [TESTBUG] Run TestDockerMemoryMetrics.java with -Xcomp fails exitValue = 137
Hi all, After [JDK-8294960](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8294960), the footprint memory usage increased significantly when run the testcase with -Xcomp jvm options, then cause the testcase was killed by docker by OOM. Maybe the footprint memory usage increased was inevitable, so I think we should increase the smallest memory limite for this testcase. Only change the testcase, the change has been verified, no risk. - Commit messages: - 8334771: [TESTBUG] Run TestDockerMemoryMetrics.java with -Xcomp fails exitValue = 137 Changes: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19864/files Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=19864&range=00 Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8334771 Stats: 5 lines in 2 files changed: 2 ins; 0 del; 3 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19864.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/19864/head:pull/19864 PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19864
RFR: 8335150: Test LogGeneratedClassesTest.java fails on rpmbuild mock enviroment
Hi all, Test `test/jdk/java/lang/invoke/lambda/LogGeneratedClassesTest.java` fails on rpm build mock environment. The `df -h` command return fail `df: cannot read table of mounted file systems: No such file or directory` on the rpm build mock environment also. I think it's a environmental issue, and the environmental issue should not cause the test fails, it should skip the test. Only change the testcase, the change has been verified locally, no risk. - Commit messages: - 8335150: Test LogGeneratedClassesTest.java fails on rpmbuild mock enviroment Changes: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19905/files Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=19905&range=00 Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8335150 Stats: 23 lines in 1 file changed: 15 ins; 3 del; 5 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19905.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/19905/head:pull/19905 PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19905
Re: RFR: 8335150: Test LogGeneratedClassesTest.java fails on rpmbuild mock enviroment
On Wed, 26 Jun 2024 12:15:33 GMT, SendaoYan wrote: > Hi all, > Test `test/jdk/java/lang/invoke/lambda/LogGeneratedClassesTest.java` fails on > rpm build mock environment. The `df -h` command return fail `df: cannot read > table of mounted file systems: No such file or directory` on the rpm build > mock environment also. I think it's a environmental issue, and the > environmental issue should not cause the test fails, it should skip the test. > > Only change the testcase, the change has been verified locally, no risk. The GHA test runner report a failure, I think it's unrelated to this PR. 1. linux x86 fastdebug run test `compiler/interpreter/Test6833129.java` crash `oopDesc::size_given_klass`, seems similar to [JDK-8334760](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8334760) - PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19905#issuecomment-2191995696
Re: RFR: 8335150: Test LogGeneratedClassesTest.java fails on rpmbuild mock enviroment [v2]
> Hi all, > Test `test/jdk/java/lang/invoke/lambda/LogGeneratedClassesTest.java` fails on > rpm build mock environment. The `df -h` command return fail `df: cannot read > table of mounted file systems: No such file or directory` on the rpm build > mock environment also. I think it's a environmental issue, and the > environmental issue should not cause the test fails, it should skip the test. > > Only change the testcase, the change has been verified locally, no risk. SendaoYan has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision: add a word throw - Changes: - all: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19905/files - new: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19905/files/54ac1747..8931debe Webrevs: - full: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=19905&range=01 - incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=19905&range=00-01 Stats: 1 line in 1 file changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 1 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19905.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/19905/head:pull/19905 PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19905
Re: RFR: 8323640: [TESTBUG]testMemoryFailCount in jdk/internal/platform/docker/TestDockerMemoryMetrics.java always fail because OOM killed [v3]
On Tue, 2 Jul 2024 20:49:05 GMT, Dean Long wrote: > Why does 8M trigger the OOM Killer, but 1M does not? 8M trigger the OOM killer on some environments, maybe there are some test machines that 8M trigger the OOM exception rather than OOM killer. The intention of change `8M chunks per iteration` to `1M chunks per iteration`, is make sure this testcase throw OOM exception and then [break the memory allocation loop](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/master/test/jdk/jdk/internal/platform/docker/MetricsMemoryTester.java#L88) before jvm process OOM killed by docker container. - PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/17514#issuecomment-2204847751
Re: RFR: 8334057: JLinkReproducibleTest.java support receive test.tool.vm.opts
On Wed, 12 Jun 2024 02:00:41 GMT, SendaoYan wrote: > Hi all, > Currently, the testcase `test/jdk/tools/jlink/JLinkReproducibleTest.java` > doesn't receive jvm options from jtreg. > I think it's necessory to receive jvm options from jtreg. > The change has been verified, only change the testacase, the risk is low. Hi, can anyone take look this PR. - PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19669#issuecomment-2219642848
Re: RFR: 8334057: JLinkReproducibleTest.java support receive test.tool.vm.opts
On Wed, 10 Jul 2024 06:12:56 GMT, SendaoYan wrote: >> Hi all, >> Currently, the testcase `test/jdk/tools/jlink/JLinkReproducibleTest.java` >> doesn't receive jvm options from jtreg. >> I think it's necessory to receive jvm options from jtreg. >> The change has been verified, only change the testacase, the risk is low. > > Hi, can anyone take look this PR. > Hello @sendaoYan, can you add some details to the JBS issue explaining why > this change is necessary and what fails (if anything) in the absence of this > change? I suspect you might be running into some failure with this test, but > in its current form in the JBS description, it's not clear what the issue is. Okey. - PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19669#issuecomment-113909
Re: RFR: 8334057: JLinkReproducibleTest.java support receive test.tool.vm.opts
On Wed, 12 Jun 2024 02:00:41 GMT, SendaoYan wrote: > Hi all, > Currently, the testcase `test/jdk/tools/jlink/JLinkReproducibleTest.java` > doesn't receive jvm options from jtreg. > I think it's necessory to receive jvm options from jtreg. > Fix solution similar to > [JDK-8157850](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8157850), the change has > been verified, only change the testacase, the risk is low. Fix solution similar to [JDK-8157850](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8157850). - PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19669#issuecomment-2223198687
Re: RFR: 8334057: JLinkReproducibleTest.java support receive test.tool.vm.opts
On Fri, 12 Jul 2024 07:05:34 GMT, Jaikiran Pai wrote: > I'll run this change against our CI instance just to be sure this doesn't > cause unexpected issues. I'll approve the PR once those runs complete. Thanks. - PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19669#issuecomment-2224988113
Re: RFR: 8334057: JLinkReproducibleTest.java support receive test.tool.vm.opts [v2]
> Hi all, > Currently, the testcase `test/jdk/tools/jlink/JLinkReproducibleTest.java` > doesn't receive jvm options from jtreg. > I think it's necessory to receive jvm options from jtreg. > Fix solution similar to > [JDK-8157850](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8157850), the change has > been verified, only change the testacase, the risk is low. SendaoYan has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision: make variable TOOL_VM_OPTIONS to private - Changes: - all: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19669/files - new: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19669/files/60e746fd..89418239 Webrevs: - full: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=19669&range=01 - incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=19669&range=00-01 Stats: 1 line in 1 file changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 1 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19669.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/19669/head:pull/19669 PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19669
Re: RFR: 8334057: JLinkReproducibleTest.java support receive test.tool.vm.opts [v2]
On Fri, 12 Jul 2024 07:05:58 GMT, Jaikiran Pai wrote:
>> SendaoYan has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> make variable TOOL_VM_OPTIONS to private
>
> test/jdk/tools/jlink/JLinkReproducibleTest.java line 41:
>
>> 39: public class JLinkReproducibleTest {
>> 40:
>> 41: static final String TOOL_VM_OPTIONS =
>> System.getProperty("test.tool.vm.opts", "");
>
> Nit - this can be made `private`
Thanks for the review. The variable has made to private.
-
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19669#discussion_r1675445554
Re: RFR: 8334057: JLinkReproducibleTest.java support receive test.tool.vm.opts [v2]
On Fri, 12 Jul 2024 07:39:11 GMT, SendaoYan wrote: >> Hi all, >> Currently, the testcase `test/jdk/tools/jlink/JLinkReproducibleTest.java` >> doesn't receive jvm options from jtreg. >> I think it's necessory to receive jvm options from jtreg. >> Fix solution similar to >> [JDK-8157850](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8157850), the change has >> been verified, only change the testacase, the risk is low. > > SendaoYan has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional > commit since the last revision: > > make variable TOOL_VM_OPTIONS to private Thanks for the review and the testing. - PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19669#issuecomment-2226824048
Re: RFR: 8334057: JLinkReproducibleTest.java support receive test.tool.vm.opts [v2]
On Fri, 12 Jul 2024 07:39:11 GMT, SendaoYan wrote: >> Hi all, >> Currently, the testcase `test/jdk/tools/jlink/JLinkReproducibleTest.java` >> doesn't receive jvm options from jtreg. >> I think it's necessory to receive jvm options from jtreg. >> Fix solution similar to >> [JDK-8157850](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8157850), the change has >> been verified, only change the testacase, the risk is low. > > SendaoYan has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional > commit since the last revision: > > make variable TOOL_VM_OPTIONS to private Does this PR need 2rd reviewer. - PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19669#issuecomment-2228780859
Re: RFR: 8334057: JLinkReproducibleTest.java support receive test.tool.vm.opts
On Fri, 12 Jul 2024 07:04:33 GMT, Jaikiran Pai wrote: > What you propose in this PR looks fine to me and matches some other tests > which do a similar thing. Maybe we should do the same thing in some other > tests in this directory, to keep them consistent. For now though, I think > what you have here is fine and I don't expect you to update these other > places. I have created a jbs issue [JDK-8336405](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8336405) to record this task. - PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19669#issuecomment-2228836814
Re: RFR: 8334057: JLinkReproducibleTest.java support receive test.tool.vm.opts [v2]
On Mon, 15 Jul 2024 16:02:49 GMT, Jaikiran Pai wrote: > > Does this PR need 2rd reviewer. > > core-libs area doesn't mandate 2 reviews. The current PR is a test > infrastructure change and doesn't impact the functionality of the test. The > change has been tested in our CI and appears to work fine without introducing > any regressions. Plus the PR has been open for more than 24 hours. So I think > it is OK to issue a "integrate" whenever you are ready. Thanks. - PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19669#issuecomment-2229776964
Integrated: 8334057: JLinkReproducibleTest.java support receive test.tool.vm.opts
On Wed, 12 Jun 2024 02:00:41 GMT, SendaoYan wrote: > Hi all, > Currently, the testcase `test/jdk/tools/jlink/JLinkReproducibleTest.java` > doesn't receive jvm options from jtreg. > I think it's necessory to receive jvm options from jtreg. > Fix solution similar to > [JDK-8157850](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8157850), the change has > been verified, only change the testacase, the risk is low. This pull request has now been integrated. Changeset: 8feabc84 Author:SendaoYan Committer: Jaikiran Pai URL: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/commit/8feabc849ba2f617c8c6dbb2ec5074297beb6437 Stats: 7 lines in 1 file changed: 6 ins; 0 del; 1 mod 8334057: JLinkReproducibleTest.java support receive test.tool.vm.opts Reviewed-by: jpai - PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19669
Re: RFR: 8334057: JLinkReproducibleTest.java support receive test.tool.vm.opts [v2]
On Fri, 12 Jul 2024 07:39:11 GMT, SendaoYan wrote: >> Hi all, >> Currently, the testcase `test/jdk/tools/jlink/JLinkReproducibleTest.java` >> doesn't receive jvm options from jtreg. >> I think it's necessory to receive jvm options from jtreg. >> Fix solution similar to >> [JDK-8157850](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8157850), the change has >> been verified, only change the testacase, the risk is low. > > SendaoYan has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional > commit since the last revision: > > make variable TOOL_VM_OPTIONS to private Thanks for the sponsor. - PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19669#issuecomment-2229858244
Re: RFR: 8334771: [TESTBUG] Run TestDockerMemoryMetrics.java with -Xcomp fails exitValue = 137
On Mon, 24 Jun 2024 16:16:29 GMT, SendaoYan wrote: > Hi all, > After [JDK-8294960](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8294960), the > footprint memory usage increased significantly when run the testcase with > -Xcomp jvm options, then cause the testcase was killed by docker by OOM. > Maybe the footprint memory usage increased was inevitable, so I think we > should increase the smallest memory limite for this testcase. > Only change the testcase, the change has been verified, no risk. Thanks for the review and approved. - PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19864#issuecomment-2235174531
Re: RFR: 8334771: [TESTBUG] Run TestDockerMemoryMetrics.java with -Xcomp fails exitValue = 137
On Thu, 18 Jul 2024 05:52:51 GMT, Jaikiran Pai wrote: > So I think we should have this increase in memory reviewed by @asotona or > someone familiar in that area, before deciding whether these tests should be > changed. Okey. - PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19864#issuecomment-2235717028
Re: RFR: 8334771: [TESTBUG] Run TestDockerMemoryMetrics.java with -Xcomp fails exitValue = 137
On Thu, 18 Jul 2024 08:45:43 GMT, Serguei Spitsyn wrote: > Looks okay. I agree this needs to be reviewed by @asotona . Thanks for the review. I will wait reviewed by @asotona before integrate. - PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19864#issuecomment-2236003849
Re: RFR: 8334771: [TESTBUG] Run TestDockerMemoryMetrics.java with -Xcomp fails exitValue = 137
On Mon, 24 Jun 2024 16:16:29 GMT, SendaoYan wrote: > Hi all, > After [JDK-8294960](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8294960), the > footprint memory usage increased significantly when run the testcase with > -Xcomp jvm options, then cause the testcase was killed by docker by OOM. > Maybe the footprint memory usage increased was inevitable, so I think we > should increase the smallest memory limite for this testcase. > Only change the testcase, the change has been verified, no risk. > Unfortunately I'm not familiar with these tests. > After [JDK-8294960](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8294960), the > codecache usage increased significantly, non-profiled 3068Kb->3583Kb, > profiled 6408Kb->7846Kb. Can you confirm that the codecache usage increased is expected or not after [JDK-8294960](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8294960) with -Xcomp jvm option. - PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19864#issuecomment-2236291264
Re: RFR: 8334771: [TESTBUG] Run TestDockerMemoryMetrics.java with -Xcomp fails exitValue = 137
On Mon, 24 Jun 2024 16:16:29 GMT, SendaoYan wrote: > Hi all, > After [JDK-8294960](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8294960), the > footprint memory usage increased significantly when run the testcase with > -Xcomp jvm options, then cause the testcase was killed by docker by OOM. > Maybe the footprint memory usage increased was inevitable, so I think we > should increase the smallest memory limite for this testcase. > Only change the testcase, the change has been verified, no risk. Thanks for the sponsor. - PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19864#issuecomment-2238518349
Integrated: 8334771: [TESTBUG] Run TestDockerMemoryMetrics.java with -Xcomp fails exitValue = 137
On Mon, 24 Jun 2024 16:16:29 GMT, SendaoYan wrote: > Hi all, > After [JDK-8294960](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8294960), the > footprint memory usage increased significantly when run the testcase with > -Xcomp jvm options, then cause the testcase was killed by docker by OOM. > Maybe the footprint memory usage increased was inevitable, so I think we > should increase the smallest memory limite for this testcase. > Only change the testcase, the change has been verified, no risk. This pull request has now been integrated. Changeset: fa5ad700 Author:SendaoYan Committer: Serguei Spitsyn URL: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/commit/fa5ad700bb6a92aef7577969e09b4fbd93feb388 Stats: 5 lines in 2 files changed: 2 ins; 0 del; 3 mod 8334771: [TESTBUG] Run TestDockerMemoryMetrics.java with -Xcomp fails exitValue = 137 Reviewed-by: lmesnik, sspitsyn - PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19864
Re: RFR: 8334771: [TESTBUG] Run TestDockerMemoryMetrics.java with -Xcomp fails exitValue = 137
On Thu, 18 Jul 2024 11:42:17 GMT, SendaoYan wrote: >> Hi all, >> After [JDK-8294960](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8294960), the >> footprint memory usage increased significantly when run the testcase with >> -Xcomp jvm options, then cause the testcase was killed by docker by OOM. >> Maybe the footprint memory usage increased was inevitable, so I think we >> should increase the smallest memory limite for this testcase. >> Only change the testcase, the change has been verified, no risk. > >> Unfortunately I'm not familiar with these tests. > >> After [JDK-8294960](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8294960), the >> codecache usage increased significantly, non-profiled 3068Kb->3583Kb, >> profiled 6408Kb->7846Kb. > > Can you confirm that the codecache usage increased is expected or not after > [JDK-8294960](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8294960) with -Xcomp jvm > option. > @sendaoYan, Given Adam's inputs and the reviews you have had for this change, > I think you should be able to go ahead and integrate this. Thanks all for the review. Can you sponsor this PR for me. @jaikiran - PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19864#issuecomment-2238306043
Re: RFR: 8335150: Test LogGeneratedClassesTest.java fails on rpmbuild mock enviroment [v2]
On Wed, 26 Jun 2024 15:40:36 GMT, SendaoYan wrote: >> Hi all, >> Test `test/jdk/java/lang/invoke/lambda/LogGeneratedClassesTest.java` fails >> on rpm build mock environment. The `df -h` command return fail `df: cannot >> read table of mounted file systems: No such file or directory` on the rpm >> build mock environment also. I think it's a environmental issue, and the >> environmental issue should not cause the test fails, it should skip the test. >> >> Only change the testcase, the change has been verified locally, no risk. > > SendaoYan has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional > commit since the last revision: > > add a word throw Hi, is there anyone take look this PR. - PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19905#issuecomment-2249202447
Re: RFR: 8335150: Test LogGeneratedClassesTest.java fails on rpmbuild mock enviroment [v3]
> Hi all, > Test `test/jdk/java/lang/invoke/lambda/LogGeneratedClassesTest.java` fails on > rpm build mock environment. The `df -h` command return fail `df: cannot read > table of mounted file systems: No such file or directory` on the rpm build > mock environment also. I think it's a environmental issue, and the > environmental issue should not cause the test fails, it should skip the test. > > Only change the testcase, the change has been verified locally, no risk. SendaoYan has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision: 1. Just catch the IOException here when getting the FileStore and skip the test instead of checking for specific exception messages. 2. Throw a org.testng.SkipException instead print and return - Changes: - all: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19905/files - new: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19905/files/8931debe..9c7946f8 Webrevs: - full: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=19905&range=02 - incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=19905&range=01-02 Stats: 17 lines in 1 file changed: 1 ins; 11 del; 5 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19905.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/19905/head:pull/19905 PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19905
Re: RFR: 8335150: Test LogGeneratedClassesTest.java fails on rpmbuild mock enviroment [v2]
On Thu, 25 Jul 2024 04:53:33 GMT, Jaikiran Pai wrote:
>> SendaoYan has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> add a word throw
>
> test/jdk/java/lang/invoke/lambda/LogGeneratedClassesTest.java line 216:
>
>> 214: } catch (IOException e) {
>> 215: if (e.getMessage().contains("Mount point not found")) {
>> 216: // We would like to skip the test with a cause with
>
> Hello @sendaoYan, it feels very specific and odd to be checking only for this
> exception message. This test method's goal appears to be to create a
> read-only directory into which it wants to write out the proxy classes and
> verify that it won't be able to do that. For that it first verifies that the
> underlying `FileStore` supports posix file attributes. If it's not able to
> ascertain that the underlying `FileStore` has posix support, then it skips
> the test.
>
> So I think we should just catch the `IOException` here when getting the
> FileStore and skip the test instead of checking for specific exception
> messages. While we are at it, we should throw a `org.testng.SkipException`
> (this is a testng test) from this method wherever we are currently skipping
> the test execution by writing out a System.out warning message and returning.
Thanks for your advice, the checking for specific exception messages has been
replaced to just catch the IOException when getting the FileStore, and all the
`System.out warning message and returning` has been replaced to
`org.testng.SkipException`.
Additional, the `org.testng.SkipException` seems do not work normally in
[jtreg](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/CODETOOLS-7903708) for now.
-
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19905#discussion_r1691168794
Re: RFR: 8335150: Test LogGeneratedClassesTest.java fails on rpmbuild mock enviroment [v3]
On Thu, 25 Jul 2024 10:23:29 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote: > Would it possible to provide a summary on how Mock works and how we end up > with the current directory in a location that doesn't have a mount point? The rpmbuild mock enviroment is like a sandbox, which created by `chroot` shell command, in the rpmbuild mock enviroment, `df -h` report `cannot read table of mounted file systems`, and java Files.getFileStore also throw `IOException`. We want to build and test the jdk in this `sandbox`, and the default jtreg work directory is `JTWork` in current directory, so this testcase will report fails.  - PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19905#issuecomment-2250225244
Re: RFR: 8335150: Test LogGeneratedClassesTest.java fails on rpmbuild mock enviroment [v3]
On Thu, 25 Jul 2024 09:50:10 GMT, SendaoYan wrote: >> Hi all, >> Test `test/jdk/java/lang/invoke/lambda/LogGeneratedClassesTest.java` fails >> on rpm build mock environment. The `df -h` command return fail `df: cannot >> read table of mounted file systems: No such file or directory` on the rpm >> build mock environment also. I think it's a environmental issue, and the >> environmental issue should not cause the test fails, it should skip the test. >> >> The rpmbuild mock enviroment is like a sandbox, which created by `chroot` >> shell command, in the rpmbuild mock enviroment, `df -h` report `cannot read >> table of mounted file systems`, and java Files.getFileStore also throw >> `IOException`. We want to build and test the jdk in this `sandbox`, and the >> default jtreg work directory is `JTWork` in current directory, so this >> testcase will report fails. >> >> Only change the testcase, the change has been verified locally, no risk. > > SendaoYan has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional > commit since the last revision: > > 1. Just catch the IOException here when getting the FileStore and skip the > test instead of checking for specific exception messages. 2. Throw a > org.testng.SkipException instead print and return GHA report a failure: linux x86 `compiler/interpreter/Test6833129.java` fails `SIGSEGV in oopDesc::size_given_klass`, this issue has been recorded by [JDK-8334760](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8334760), it's unrelated to this PR. - PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19905#issuecomment-2250234321
Re: RFR: 8335150: Test LogGeneratedClassesTest.java fails on rpmbuild mock enviroment [v3]
On Thu, 25 Jul 2024 12:48:20 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote: > Okay, but doesn't mean that lots of other tests will fail too, esp. tests in > jdk_nio test group. Currently we observer only this test fails of tier1. - PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19905#issuecomment-2250252865
Re: RFR: 8335150: Test LogGeneratedClassesTest.java fails on rpmbuild mock enviroment [v3]
On Thu, 25 Jul 2024 13:23:37 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote: > Is this because you only run tier1 or do you mean this is the only test that > fails? We only run tier1 on rpmbuild mock enviroment. - PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19905#issuecomment-2250369276
Re: RFR: 8335150: Test LogGeneratedClassesTest.java fails on rpmbuild mock enviroment [v4]
> Hi all, > Test `test/jdk/java/lang/invoke/lambda/LogGeneratedClassesTest.java` fails on > rpm build mock environment. The `df -h` command return fail `df: cannot read > table of mounted file systems: No such file or directory` on the rpm build > mock environment also. I think it's a environmental issue, and the > environmental issue should not cause the test fails, it should skip the test. > > The rpmbuild mock enviroment is like a sandbox, which created by `chroot` > shell command, in the rpmbuild mock enviroment, `df -h` report `cannot read > table of mounted file systems`, and java Files.getFileStore also throw > `IOException`. We want to build and test the jdk in this `sandbox`, and the > default jtreg work directory is `JTWork` in current directory, so this > testcase will report fails. > > Only change the testcase, the change has been verified locally, no risk. SendaoYan has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision: add the exception's toString() into SkipException - Changes: - all: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19905/files - new: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19905/files/9c7946f8..b3af3f87 Webrevs: - full: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=19905&range=03 - incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=19905&range=02-03 Stats: 2 lines in 1 file changed: 0 ins; 1 del; 1 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19905.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/19905/head:pull/19905 PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19905
Re: RFR: 8335150: Test LogGeneratedClassesTest.java fails on rpmbuild mock enviroment [v3]
On Fri, 26 Jul 2024 04:30:16 GMT, Jaikiran Pai wrote:
>> SendaoYan has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> 1. Just catch the IOException here when getting the FileStore and skip the
>> test instead of checking for specific exception messages. 2. Throw a
>> org.testng.SkipException instead print and return
>
> test/jdk/java/lang/invoke/lambda/LogGeneratedClassesTest.java line 217:
>
>> 215: } catch (IOException e) {
>> 216: e.printStackTrace();
>> 217: throw new SkipException("WARNING: IOException occur.
>> Skipping testDumpDirNotWritable test.");
>
> Nit: "occurred" instead "occur". Additionally, I would suggest even the
> exception's toString() in that message just to provide additional context at
> the location wherever this will get reported outside of a .jtr (if at all).
> So something like:
>
> throw new SkipException("WARNING: IOException occurred: " + e + ", Skipping
> testDumpDirNotWritable test.");
Thanks for your advice and review again.
-
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19905#discussion_r1692570083
Re: RFR: 8335150: Test LogGeneratedClassesTest.java fails on rpmbuild mock enviroment [v4]
On Fri, 26 Jul 2024 06:29:18 GMT, Jaikiran Pai wrote: > The latest change looks OK to me. Please wait for Alan to decide if this is > OK to integrate. Okey, thanks. - PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19905#issuecomment-2252123786
RFR: 8337720: Test com/sun/jndi/dns/ConfigTests/Timeout.java fails with C1 mode by fastdebug binary
Hi all, The test `com/sun/jndi/dns/ConfigTests/Timeout.java` fails with `-Xcomp -XX:TieredStopAtLevel=1` jvm options by fastdebug binary. In C1 mode and with debug binary, the JIT comple time longger than -Xmixed and release binary is accatable. So this should not report fails with `-Xcomp -XX:TieredStopAtLevel=1` jvm options by fastdebug binary. Thus, this test should be skip when run with `-Xcomp -XX:TieredStopAtLevel=1` jvm options by fastdebug binary. - Commit messages: - update copyright year to 2024 - 8337720: Test com/sun/jndi/dns/ConfigTests/Timeout.java fails with C1 mode by fastdebug binary Changes: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/20440/files Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=20440&range=00 Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8337720 Stats: 3 lines in 1 file changed: 1 ins; 0 del; 2 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/20440.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/20440/head:pull/20440 PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/20440
Re: RFR: 8337720: Test com/sun/jndi/dns/ConfigTests/Timeout.java fails with C1 mode by fastdebug binary
On Fri, 2 Aug 2024 08:43:41 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote: > I assume it would be better to re-examine the timeout + retry used in the > test to make it more robust when running with a debug build and different > compilation modes. Okey, I will re-examine the timeout value in linux x64/linux aarch64/linux riscv64. - PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/20440#issuecomment-2264889753
Re: RFR: 8335150: Test LogGeneratedClassesTest.java fails on rpmbuild mock enviroment [v3]
On Thu, 25 Jul 2024 13:23:37 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote: >>> Okay, but doesn't mean that lots of other tests will fail too, esp. tests >>> in jdk_nio test group. >> >> Currently we observer only this test fails of tier1. > >> > Okay, but doesn't mean that lots of other tests will fail too, esp. tests >> > in jdk_nio test group. >> >> Currently we observer only this test fails of tier1. > > Is this because you only run tier1 or do you mean this is the only test that > fails? @AlanBateman Does this PR suitable to integrate. - PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19905#issuecomment-2288566011
Re: RFR: 8335150: Test LogGeneratedClassesTest.java fails on rpmbuild mock enviroment [v3]
On Wed, 14 Aug 2024 13:52:11 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote: > The testing scenario is very unusual but I think it's okay to skip when POSIX > permissions aren't supported. Thanks. /integrate - PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19905#issuecomment-2289149517
Integrated: 8335150: Test LogGeneratedClassesTest.java fails on rpmbuild mock enviroment
On Wed, 26 Jun 2024 12:15:33 GMT, SendaoYan wrote: > Hi all, > Test `test/jdk/java/lang/invoke/lambda/LogGeneratedClassesTest.java` fails on > rpm build mock environment. The `df -h` command return fail `df: cannot read > table of mounted file systems: No such file or directory` on the rpm build > mock environment also. I think it's a environmental issue, and the > environmental issue should not cause the test fails, it should skip the test. > > The rpmbuild mock enviroment is like a sandbox, which created by `chroot` > shell command, in the rpmbuild mock enviroment, `df -h` report `cannot read > table of mounted file systems`, and java Files.getFileStore also throw > `IOException`. We want to build and test the jdk in this `sandbox`, and the > default jtreg work directory is `JTWork` in current directory, so this > testcase will report fails. > > Only change the testcase, the change has been verified locally, no risk. This pull request has now been integrated. Changeset: 2f7ba781 Author:SendaoYan Committer: Jaikiran Pai URL: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/commit/2f7ba781bf2e4e6d0fa658c19f86c6c05d60358a Stats: 18 lines in 1 file changed: 7 ins; 6 del; 5 mod 8335150: Test LogGeneratedClassesTest.java fails on rpmbuild mock enviroment Reviewed-by: jpai - PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19905
Re: RFR: 8335150: Test LogGeneratedClassesTest.java fails on rpmbuild mock enviroment [v4]
On Fri, 26 Jul 2024 06:29:05 GMT, SendaoYan wrote: >> Hi all, >> Test `test/jdk/java/lang/invoke/lambda/LogGeneratedClassesTest.java` fails >> on rpm build mock environment. The `df -h` command return fail `df: cannot >> read table of mounted file systems: No such file or directory` on the rpm >> build mock environment also. I think it's a environmental issue, and the >> environmental issue should not cause the test fails, it should skip the test. >> >> The rpmbuild mock enviroment is like a sandbox, which created by `chroot` >> shell command, in the rpmbuild mock enviroment, `df -h` report `cannot read >> table of mounted file systems`, and java Files.getFileStore also throw >> `IOException`. We want to build and test the jdk in this `sandbox`, and the >> default jtreg work directory is `JTWork` in current directory, so this >> testcase will report fails. >> >> Only change the testcase, the change has been verified locally, no risk. > > SendaoYan has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional > commit since the last revision: > > add the exception's toString() into SkipException Thanks for the sponsor. - PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19905#issuecomment-2295768406
Re: RFR: 8335150: Test LogGeneratedClassesTest.java fails on rpmbuild mock enviroment [v4]
On Mon, 19 Aug 2024 04:43:24 GMT, Jaikiran Pai wrote: > tier1 testing with these changes against latest master branch completed > without issues. I'll go ahead and sponsor this. Thanks for the testing and sponsor. - PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19905#issuecomment-2295775965
RFR: 8338630: Test java/nio/channels/DatagramChannel/SendReceiveMaxSize.java timeout
Hi, On linux test environments which has docker service, `ifconfig` shows that `docker0` appears to be a virtual ethernet bridge which is created by the docker host. And the `docker0` virtual ethernet bridge may cause test `java/nio/channels/DatagramChannel/SendReceiveMaxSize.java` bind `docker0` ander network port. I think we should just skip "docker0" interfaces when looking for an IPv4 address for tests. Change has been verified, test fix only, the risk is low. - Commit messages: - 8338630: Test java/nio/channels/DatagramChannel/SendReceiveMaxSize.java timeout Changes: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/20658/files Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=20658&range=00 Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8338630 Stats: 8 lines in 1 file changed: 7 ins; 0 del; 1 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/20658.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/20658/head:pull/20658 PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/20658
RFR: 8323640: [TESTBUG]testMemoryFailCount in jdk/internal/platform/docker/TestDockerMemoryMetrics.java always fail because OOM killed
Reviewed-by: Yi Yang - Commit messages: - 8323640: [TESTBUG]testMemoryFailCount in jdk/internal/platform/docker/TestDockerMemoryMetrics.java always fail because OOM killed Changes: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/17386/files Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=17386&range=00 Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8323640 Stats: 3 lines in 1 file changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 3 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/17386.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/17386/head:pull/17386 PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/17386
Re: RFR: 8323640: [TESTBUG]testMemoryFailCount in jdk/internal/platform/docker/TestDockerMemoryMetrics.java always fail because OOM killed
On Fri, 12 Jan 2024 03:31:37 GMT, sendaoYan wrote: > Reviewed-by: Yi Yang The test case before this PR has a maximum heap of 64MB and applies for 8M of memory each time in the for loop. When applying for memory for the sixth time, it was killed by the docker container because of OOM, jdk.internal.platform.Metrics.systemMetrics().getMemoryFailCount( ) interface has no chance to return 1, and the Java process returns exit code 137. The maximum heap is also 64M, The PR is changed to 1KB each time to ensure that the getMemoryFailCount() interface has a chance to return 1 and the test case has a chance to exit the for loop of memory allocation. ## test result before this PR:  ## test result after this PR:  - PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/17386#issuecomment-1889517014
RFR: 8339714: Delete tedious bool type define
Hi all, This PR delete tedious bool type define in `src/java.base/unix/native/libjsig/jsig.c` and `src/utils/hsdis/binutils/hsdis-binutils.c`. After JEP 347([JDK-8246032](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8246032)), I think we can "#include " to use bool type directly, like [string.h](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/master/src/java.desktop/unix/native/libpipewire/include/spa/utils/string.h#L13) do. Make code more concision, the risk is quite low. Additional testing: - [x] Local build with --with-hsdis=binutils --with-binutils=$HOME/software/binutils - [ ] Jtreg tests(include tier1/tier2/tier3 etc.) on linux x64 - [ ] Jtreg tests(include tier1/tier2/tier3 etc.) on linux aarch64 - Commit messages: - 8339714: Delete tedious bool type define Changes: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/20909/files Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=20909&range=00 Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8339714 Stats: 14 lines in 2 files changed: 1 ins; 12 del; 1 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/20909.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/20909/head:pull/20909 PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/20909
Re: RFR: 8339714: Delete tedious bool type define
On Mon, 9 Sep 2024 12:06:25 GMT, Julian Waters wrote: >> Hi all, >> This PR delete tedious bool type define in >> `src/java.base/unix/native/libjsig/jsig.c` and >> `src/utils/hsdis/binutils/hsdis-binutils.c`. After JEP >> 347([JDK-8246032](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8246032)), I think we >> can "#include " to use bool type directly, like >> [string.h](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/master/src/java.desktop/unix/native/libpipewire/include/spa/utils/string.h#L13) >> do. >> Make code more concision, the risk is quite low. >> >> Additional testing: >> >> - [x] Local build with --with-hsdis=binutils >> --with-binutils=$HOME/software/binutils >> - [ ] Jtreg tests(include tier1/tier2/tier3 etc.) on linux x64 >> - [ ] Jtreg tests(include tier1/tier2/tier3 etc.) on linux aarch64 > > src/java.base/unix/native/libjsig/jsig.c line 46: > >> 44: #include >> 45: >> 46: #if (__STDC_VERSION__ >= 199901L) > > Since this does include stdbool.h already, this change looks ok Okey. - PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/20909#discussion_r1750201356
Re: RFR: 8339714: Delete tedious bool type define
On Mon, 9 Sep 2024 12:07:54 GMT, Julian Waters wrote: >> Hi all, >> This PR delete tedious bool type define in >> `src/java.base/unix/native/libjsig/jsig.c` and >> `src/utils/hsdis/binutils/hsdis-binutils.c`. After JEP >> 347([JDK-8246032](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8246032)), I think we >> can "#include " to use bool type directly, like >> [string.h](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/master/src/java.desktop/unix/native/libpipewire/include/spa/utils/string.h#L13) >> do. >> Make code more concision, the risk is quite low. >> >> Additional testing: >> >> - [x] Local build with --with-hsdis=binutils >> --with-binutils=$HOME/software/binutils >> - [ ] Jtreg tests(include tier1/tier2/tier3 etc.) on linux x64 >> - [ ] Jtreg tests(include tier1/tier2/tier3 etc.) on linux aarch64 > > src/utils/hsdis/binutils/hsdis-binutils.c line 67: > >> 65: #include "hsdis.h" >> 66: >> 67: #ifndef bool > > I'm a little worried about this change. hsdis may really need an int here. If > that turns out to not be the case then I'll retract my concerns I have verified this change locally, include build hsdis.so and check the functional with command java -XX:+UnlockDiagnosticVMOptions -XX:+PrintAssembly -version. The verified show this change for hsdis.so work normally. - PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/20909#discussion_r1750211438
Re: RFR: 8339714: Delete tedious bool type define
On Mon, 9 Sep 2024 13:03:49 GMT, Julian Waters wrote: >> I have verified this change locally, include build hsdis.so and check the >> functional with command java -XX:+UnlockDiagnosticVMOptions >> -XX:+PrintAssembly -version. The verified show this change for hsdis.so work >> normally. > > Ok, sounds good Thanks for the review. - PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/20909#discussion_r1750243576
Re: RFR: 8339714: Delete tedious bool type define
On Mon, 9 Sep 2024 09:50:59 GMT, SendaoYan wrote: > Hi all, > This PR delete tedious bool type define in > `src/java.base/unix/native/libjsig/jsig.c` and > `src/utils/hsdis/binutils/hsdis-binutils.c`. After JEP > 347([JDK-8246032](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8246032)), I think we > can "#include " to use bool type directly, like > [string.h](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/master/src/java.desktop/unix/native/libpipewire/include/spa/utils/string.h#L13) > do. > Make code more concision, the risk is quite low. > > Additional testing: > > - [x] Local build with --with-hsdis=binutils > --with-binutils=$HOME/software/binutils > - [x] Jtreg tests(include tier1/tier2/tier3 etc.) on linux x64 > - [x] Jtreg tests(include tier1/tier2/tier3 etc.) on linux aarch64 Thanks all for the review. - PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/20909#issuecomment-2340620724
Integrated: 8339714: Delete tedious bool type define
On Mon, 9 Sep 2024 09:50:59 GMT, SendaoYan wrote: > Hi all, > This PR delete tedious bool type define in > `src/java.base/unix/native/libjsig/jsig.c` and > `src/utils/hsdis/binutils/hsdis-binutils.c`. After JEP > 347([JDK-8246032](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8246032)), I think we > can "#include " to use bool type directly, like > [string.h](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/master/src/java.desktop/unix/native/libpipewire/include/spa/utils/string.h#L13) > do. > Make code more concision, the risk is quite low. > > Additional testing: > > - [x] Local build with --with-hsdis=binutils > --with-binutils=$HOME/software/binutils > - [x] Jtreg tests(include tier1/tier2/tier3 etc.) on linux x64 > - [x] Jtreg tests(include tier1/tier2/tier3 etc.) on linux aarch64 This pull request has now been integrated. Changeset: a6faf824 Author:SendaoYan Committer: David Holmes URL: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/commit/a6faf8247b58d73dca199fe1e8b0e914c415f67f Stats: 14 lines in 2 files changed: 1 ins; 12 del; 1 mod 8339714: Delete tedious bool type define Reviewed-by: jwaters, dholmes - PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/20909
Re: RFR: 8339714: Delete tedious bool type define
On Mon, 9 Sep 2024 09:50:59 GMT, SendaoYan wrote: > Hi all, > This PR delete tedious bool type define in > `src/java.base/unix/native/libjsig/jsig.c` and > `src/utils/hsdis/binutils/hsdis-binutils.c`. After JEP > 347([JDK-8246032](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8246032)), I think we > can "#include " to use bool type directly, like > [string.h](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/master/src/java.desktop/unix/native/libpipewire/include/spa/utils/string.h#L13) > do. > Make code more concision, the risk is quite low. > > Additional testing: > > - [x] Local build with --with-hsdis=binutils > --with-binutils=$HOME/software/binutils > - [x] Jtreg tests(include tier1/tier2/tier3 etc.) on linux x64 > - [x] Jtreg tests(include tier1/tier2/tier3 etc.) on linux aarch64 Thanks for the sponsor. - PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/20909#issuecomment-2342489060
Re: RFR: 8323640: [TESTBUG]testMemoryFailCount in jdk/internal/platform/docker/TestDockerMemoryMetrics.java always fail because OOM killed [v2]
> 8323640: [TESTBUG]testMemoryFailCount in > jdk/internal/platform/docker/TestDockerMemoryMetrics.java always fail because > OOM killed sendaoYan has refreshed the contents of this pull request, and previous commits have been removed. The incremental views will show differences compared to the previous content of the PR. The pull request contains one new commit since the last revision: 8323640: [TESTBUG]testMemoryFailCount in jdk/internal/platform/docker/TestDockerMemoryMetrics.java always fail because OOM killed Signed-off-by: sendaoYan - Changes: - all: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/17386/files - new: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/17386/files/e8a99fe4..9f0aa2a1 Webrevs: - full: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=17386&range=01 - incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=17386&range=00-01 Stats: 0 lines in 0 files changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 0 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/17386.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/17386/head:pull/17386 PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/17386
Withdrawn: 8323640: [TESTBUG]testMemoryFailCount in jdk/internal/platform/docker/TestDockerMemoryMetrics.java always fail because OOM killed
On Fri, 12 Jan 2024 03:31:37 GMT, sendaoYan wrote: > 8323640: [TESTBUG]testMemoryFailCount in > jdk/internal/platform/docker/TestDockerMemoryMetrics.java always fail because > OOM killed This pull request has been closed without being integrated. - PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/17386
RFR: 8323640: [TESTBUG]testMemoryFailCount in jdk/internal/platform/docker/TestDockerMemoryMetrics.java always fail because OOM killed
8323640: [TESTBUG]testMemoryFailCount in jdk/internal/platform/docker/TestDockerMemoryMetrics.java always fail because OOM killed - Commit messages: - 8323640: [TESTBUG]testMemoryFailCount in jdk/internal/platform/docker/TestDockerMemoryMetrics.java always fail because OOM killed Changes: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/17514/files Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=17514&range=00 Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8323640 Stats: 3 lines in 1 file changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 3 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/17514.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/17514/head:pull/17514 PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/17514
Re: RFR: 8323640: [TESTBUG]testMemoryFailCount in jdk/internal/platform/docker/TestDockerMemoryMetrics.java always fail because OOM killed
On Mon, 22 Jan 2024 09:31:43 GMT, sendaoYan wrote: > 8323640: [TESTBUG]testMemoryFailCount in > jdk/internal/platform/docker/TestDockerMemoryMetrics.java always fail because > OOM killed The test case before this PR has a maximum heap of 64MB and applies for 8M of memory each time in the for loop. When applying for memory for the sixth time, it was killed by the docker container because of OOM, jdk.internal.platform.Metrics.systemMetrics().getMemoryFailCount( ) interface has no chance to return 1, and the Java process returns exit code 137. The maximum heap is also 64M, The PR is changed to 1KB each time to ensure that the getMemoryFailCount() interface has a chance to return 1 and the test case has a chance to exit the for loop of memory allocation. ## test result before this PR:  ## test result after this PR:  - PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/17514#issuecomment-1903589872
Re: RFR: 8323640: [TESTBUG]testMemoryFailCount in jdk/internal/platform/docker/TestDockerMemoryMetrics.java always fail because OOM killed
On Mon, 22 Jan 2024 15:03:18 GMT, Severin Gehwolf wrote: > `1k` increments for a total of `512k` times seems overkill. Are you sure > that's needed to make the test pass? How about `1MB` increments for a total > of `512` times? When the docker serivice work normally on the test machine, this test will always fail. This test want to verify the API `jdk.internal.platform.Metrics.systemMetrics().getMemoryFailCount()` work normally or not. The API return memory allocate fail times in jvm. But, before this PR, everytime it allocate `1M` memory, the API has no chance the catch the memory allocate fail, the jvm was killed by OOM. Change `8M` increments to `1K` mean to avoid OOM killed for the jvm in docker container. jvm was killed by OOM in docker container:  `1M` Increnents also can avoid OOM killed.  - PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/17514#issuecomment-1905139487
Re: RFR: 8323640: [TESTBUG]testMemoryFailCount in jdk/internal/platform/docker/TestDockerMemoryMetrics.java always fail because OOM killed [v2]
> 8323640: [TESTBUG]testMemoryFailCount in > jdk/internal/platform/docker/TestDockerMemoryMetrics.java always fail because > OOM killed sendaoYan has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision: 8323640: [TESTBUG]testMemoryFailCount in jdk/internal/platform/docker/TestDockerMemoryMetrics.java always fail because OOM killed Signed-off-by: sendaoYan - Changes: - all: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/17514/files - new: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/17514/files/be81665d..969b608d Webrevs: - full: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=17514&range=01 - incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=17514&range=00-01 Stats: 3 lines in 1 file changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 3 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/17514.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/17514/head:pull/17514 PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/17514
Re: RFR: 8323640: [TESTBUG]testMemoryFailCount in jdk/internal/platform/docker/TestDockerMemoryMetrics.java always fail because OOM killed [v3]
> 8323640: [TESTBUG]testMemoryFailCount in > jdk/internal/platform/docker/TestDockerMemoryMetrics.java always fail because > OOM killed sendaoYan has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision: 8323640: [TESTBUG]testMemoryFailCount in jdk/internal/platform/docker/TestDockerMemoryMetrics.java always fail because OOM killed Signed-off-by: sendaoYan - Changes: - all: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/17514/files - new: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/17514/files/969b608d..d1eb4fac Webrevs: - full: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=17514&range=02 - incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=17514&range=01-02 Stats: 1 line in 1 file changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 1 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/17514.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/17514/head:pull/17514 PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/17514
Re: RFR: 8323640: [TESTBUG]testMemoryFailCount in jdk/internal/platform/docker/TestDockerMemoryMetrics.java always fail because OOM killed [v3]
On Tue, 23 Jan 2024 13:04:43 GMT, sendaoYan wrote: >> 8323640: [TESTBUG]testMemoryFailCount in >> jdk/internal/platform/docker/TestDockerMemoryMetrics.java always fail >> because OOM killed > > sendaoYan has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional > commit since the last revision: > > 8323640: [TESTBUG]testMemoryFailCount in > jdk/internal/platform/docker/TestDockerMemoryMetrics.java always fail because > OOM killed > > Signed-off-by: sendaoYan > GHA > Please enable GHA for your fork for future PRs. OK - PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/17514#issuecomment-1906038625
Integrated: 8323640: [TESTBUG]testMemoryFailCount in jdk/internal/platform/docker/TestDockerMemoryMetrics.java always fail because OOM killed
On Mon, 22 Jan 2024 09:31:43 GMT, sendaoYan wrote: > 8323640: [TESTBUG]testMemoryFailCount in > jdk/internal/platform/docker/TestDockerMemoryMetrics.java always fail because > OOM killed This pull request has now been integrated. Changeset: 791b427f Author:sendaoYan Committer: Severin Gehwolf URL: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/commit/791b427f4410057cdcdf8fd8ea0dcce71f7dc513 Stats: 4 lines in 1 file changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 4 mod 8323640: [TESTBUG]testMemoryFailCount in jdk/internal/platform/docker/TestDockerMemoryMetrics.java always fail because OOM killed Reviewed-by: sgehwolf - PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/17514
RFR: 8326461: tools/jlink/CheckExecutable.java fail after JDK-8325342
Before JDK-8325342(commit id:0bcece995840777db660811e4b20bb018e90439b), all the files in build/linux-x86_64-server-release/images/jdk/bin are executable:  After JDK-8325342, all the *.debuginfo files in build/linux-x86_64-server-release/images/jdk/bin are not executable:  This PR only modifies the testcase to adapt to the modification of the corresponding build script, ignoring the check of debuginfo file executable permissions, and the risk is low - Commit messages: - 8326461: tools/jlink/CheckExecutable.java fail after JDK-8325342 Changes: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/17958/files Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=17958&range=00 Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8326461 Stats: 1 line in 1 file changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 1 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/17958.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/17958/head:pull/17958 PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/17958
Integrated: 8326461: tools/jlink/CheckExecutable.java fails as .debuginfo files are not executable
On Thu, 22 Feb 2024 07:23:04 GMT, SendaoYan wrote: > Before JDK-8325342(commit id:0bcece995840777db660811e4b20bb018e90439b), all > the files in build/linux-x86_64-server-release/images/jdk/bin are executable: > >  > > > After JDK-8325342, all the *.debuginfo files in > build/linux-x86_64-server-release/images/jdk/bin are not executable: > >  > > > This PR only modifies the testcase to adapt to the modification of the > corresponding build script, ignoring the check of debuginfo file executable > permissions, and the risk is low This pull request has now been integrated. Changeset: cc1e216e Author:SendaoYan Committer: Alan Bateman URL: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/commit/cc1e216eb9e4c817f6744ec76d62f21f4bd14489 Stats: 1 line in 1 file changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 1 mod 8326461: tools/jlink/CheckExecutable.java fails as .debuginfo files are not executable Reviewed-by: shade, alanb - PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/17958
