Hi Vladimir,
It seems everybody likes this approach. In that case, I have another
idea for exclude lists. Can't we go further and extend the current
exclude list functionality a bit more? And forget about TestNG and
friends for a while I mean.
For example, we can put exclude lists into
Issue 2197 was updated to exclude test by the simplest way (very simple
exclude files).
The next step will be looking through the issue 263. I'll try it.
It will fine if somebody take care about issue 2197 (exclude files for
win/lnx on x86 for IBM and DRl VMs).
Thanks, Vladimir
On
Tim Ellison wrote:
Before you go off writing more code, just take a moment to look at
HARMONY-263 and tell us what you think of it.
It ties us to JUnit. Doesn't moving the exclude list upwards give us
more freedom?
geir
Thanks
Tim
Alexei Zakharov wrote:
Hi Vladimir,
It seems
I spoke too soon - do you mean reusing the code for managing the exclude
lists?
geir
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
Tim Ellison wrote:
Before you go off writing more code, just take a moment to look at
HARMONY-263 and tell us what you think of it.
It ties us to JUnit. Doesn't moving the
+1
I like this approach too - more flexible than current.
2006/11/16, Vladimir Ivanov [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On 11/16/06, Tim Ellison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Vladimir Ivanov wrote:
As part of solution for this issue the
*HARMONY-2197*http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-2197 was
Vladimir Ivanov wrote:
As variant, the java from 'test.jre.home' may be run with -version
option and output may be parsed and mapped to some value. In this
case all Harmony VM should support this option and print different
messages. Is it OK?
I suggest implementing version with hard coded
As I understand Alexey means HARMONY-2073, but not HARMONY-2070.
Alexei, is it correct? If not, could you clarify the point about
exn_raise_by_name_internal in your initial letter, please?
Pavel Afremov.
On 11/8/06, Rana Dasgupta [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
OK thanks Pavel, I'll try the patch
Pavel, you are correct. Rana, sorry for confusion. Both issues block
passing class library unit tests.
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-2070 [drlvm][thread]
Unhandled exception in java.exe while java.util.jar module tests
execution
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-2073
As part of solution for this issue the
*HARMONY-2197*http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-2197 was
created.
I suggest using the separate exclude list for each platform. I hope in this
case the test enabling for the different platforms will be easy. Please,
look at it.
Any comments are
Things become more and more complicated. Can anyone say why we
rejected to use TestSuites for this purpose from the very beginning?
Well, I can't say I am against using xml lists here. But the next step
will be to keep list of individual failing test methods in the xml
file. Then to create
Seems, we says about different things :)
First of all, we have no TestNG (or other harness) yet but we need now
different exclude lists for different platforms.
Also, in my vision these exclude-lists are like a buffer before we mark test
by correct tags.
When the test fails on some platform we
I like this approach.
+1
(it's exactly how I would have done it. :)
Vladimir Ivanov wrote:
As part of solution for this issue the
*HARMONY-2197*http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-2197 was
created.
I suggest using the separate exclude list for each platform. I hope in this
case the
We should also take a hard look at how to do this in DRLVM as well...
Vladimir Ivanov wrote:
Seems, we says about different things :)
First of all, we have no TestNG (or other harness) yet but we need now
different exclude lists for different platforms.
Also, in my vision these exclude-lists
Vladimir Ivanov wrote:
As part of solution for this issue the
*HARMONY-2197*http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-2197 was
created.
I suggest using the separate exclude list for each platform. I hope in this
case the test enabling for the different platforms will be easy. Please,
On 11/16/06, Tim Ellison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Vladimir Ivanov wrote:
As part of solution for this issue the
*HARMONY-2197*http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-2197 was
created.
I suggest using the separate exclude list for each platform. I hope in
this
case the test enabling
@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [drlvm] [testing] Excluding commit tests until the problem
is
fixed
On 10/17/06, Gregory Shimansky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My 2003 server is installed on a single core P4 with HT. The test
attached
to HARMONY-1669 works fine for me both with and without patch :)
I
a submitter can edit her
issues).
With best regards,
Alexei Fedotov,
Intel Java XML Engineering
-Original Message-
From: Elena Semukhina [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2006 3:56 PM
To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [drlvm] [testing] Excluding commit tests
Hi Rana.
I extend guard region as work around. It's only one way, which fix SOE on
my SuSE Linux, without potential regression of your fix. On my Linux machine
violation access signals happen one page before protected page on the stack.
It's it.
I ran all tests, and everything was OK. But
OK thanks Pavel, I'll try the patch today.
Rana
On 11/8/06, Pavel Afremov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Rana.
I extend guard region as work around. It's only one way, which fix SOE
on
my SuSE Linux, without potential regression of your fix. On my Linux
machine
violation access signals
: Rana Dasgupta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2006 4:27 AM
To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [drlvm] [testing] Excluding commit tests until the problem
is
fixed
I fixed the StackOverflow functionality problem by going back and
mapping
all pages ( guard
commit tests until the problem
is
fixed
I fixed the StackOverflow functionality problem by going back and
mapping
all pages ( guard, alternate stack ) meticulously before trying to
protect
them. I think we should have done this in the first place. I also
cleaned
up the previous
Though I tried several times, I could not repro 2070 or Alexey's specific
problems. The test attached to 2018 repros, and that I think is enough.
Pavel,
1. The patch looks good, but I could not apply and try it since my Linux
box is down.
2. Did you run all tests ( smoke, cuint, kernel, and
status of the problem?
With best regards,
Alexei Fedotov,
Intel Java XML Engineering
-Original Message-
From: Rana Dasgupta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2006 4:27 AM
To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [drlvm] [testing] Excluding commit tests until
Message-
From: Rana Dasgupta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2006 4:27 AM
To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [drlvm] [testing] Excluding commit tests until the problem
is
fixed
I fixed the StackOverflow functionality problem by going back and
mapping
all pages
2006/10/17, Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Rana Dasgupta wrote:
On 10/16/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So since I don't have Win 2003, I gotta just commit and let someone else
test?
Any committer have win 2003?
I think that it may be hard to find a test at
2006/10/17, Alexey Varlamov [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
2006/10/17, Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Rana Dasgupta wrote:
On 10/16/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So since I don't have Win 2003, I gotta just commit and let someone
else
test?
Any committer have win
-Original Message-
From: Geir Magnusson Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2006 12:01 AM
To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [drlvm] [testing] Excluding commit tests until the problem
is
fixed
Gregory Shimansky wrote:
Hello
After reading several threads about
My 2003 server is installed on a single core P4 with HT. The test attached
to HARMONY-1669 works fine for me both with and without patch :)
I may get an access to dual core server as described in JIRA but I am afraid
it will take a few days. Probably we can just apply the patch since it
doesn't
I fixed the StackOverflow functionality problem by going back and mapping
all pages ( guard, alternate stack ) meticulously before trying to protect
them. I think we should have done this in the first place. I also cleaned
up the previous initialization workarounds and asserts Geir and I had
w000t!
What init workarounds?
Rana Dasgupta wrote:
I fixed the StackOverflow functionality problem by going back and mapping
all pages ( guard, alternate stack ) meticulously before trying to protect
them. I think we should have done this in the first place. I also cleaned
up the previous
Hello
After reading several threads about drlvm tests failing for quite a while I
decided we need to exclude them temporarily until the bugs are fixed. When on
test fails, it means that other are not run after it because drlvm has
several sets of tests which run in different modes, so there
Gregory Shimansky wrote:
Hello
After reading several threads about drlvm tests failing for quite a while I
decided we need to exclude them temporarily until the bugs are fixed. When on
test fails, it means that other are not run after it because drlvm has
several sets of tests which run in
] [testing] Excluding commit tests until the problem
is
fixed
Gregory Shimansky wrote:
Hello
After reading several threads about drlvm tests failing for quite a
while
I
decided we need to exclude them temporarily until the bugs are fixed.
When on
test fails, it means that other are not run after
On Tuesday 17 October 2006 00:01 Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
Gregory Shimansky wrote:
Hello
After reading several threads about drlvm tests failing for quite a while
I decided we need to exclude them temporarily until the bugs are fixed.
When on test fails, it means that other are not run
: Tuesday, October 17, 2006 12:01 AM
To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [drlvm] [testing] Excluding commit tests until the problem
is
fixed
Gregory Shimansky wrote:
Hello
After reading several threads about drlvm tests failing for quite a
while
I
decided we need to exclude
] Excluding commit tests until the problem
is
fixed
Gregory Shimansky wrote:
Hello
After reading several threads about drlvm tests failing for quite a
while
I
decided we need to exclude them temporarily until the bugs are fixed.
When on
test fails, it means that other
17, 2006 12:23 AM
To: Fedotov, Alexei A
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Ivan Volosyuk; Artem Aliev; Nikolay Kuznetsov;
harmony-
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [drlvm] [testing] Excluding commit tests until the problem
is
fixed
On Tuesday 17 October 2006 00:13 Fedotov, Alexei A wrote:
We have mighty guys
;
harmony-
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [drlvm] [testing] Excluding commit tests until the problem
is
fixed
On Tuesday 17 October 2006 00:13 Fedotov, Alexei A wrote:
We have mighty guys on this list. Why cannot we just fix these tests
instead of excluding them?
Because a test like gc.LOS
PROTECTED]; Ivan Volosyuk; Artem Aliev; Nikolay Kuznetsov;
harmony-
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [drlvm] [testing] Excluding commit tests until the
problem
is
fixed
On Tuesday 17 October 2006 00:13 Fedotov, Alexei A wrote:
We have mighty guys on this list. Why cannot we just fix these
tests
On Tuesday 17 October 2006 01:53 Fedotov, Alexei A wrote:
Sorry for my English -
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-1669
Artem told this patch fixes a deadlock on Windows.
I haven't tried the fix. As far as I understand we put SuspendThread()
check and ResumeThread() action under
On 10/16/06, Gregory Shimansky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tuesday 17 October 2006 00:01 Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
I tried to put some back. StackTest still doesn't work. It's hard to
believe... so I gave up and just kept going :)
I wonder if the test or the implementation are wrong.
. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2006 1:30 AM
To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [drlvm] [testing] Excluding commit tests until the problem
is
fixed
Fedotov, Alexei A wrote:
Hello Gregory,
I'm ok to exclude the tests. From the other side I believe we can
On 10/16/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So since I don't have Win 2003, I gotta just commit and let someone else
test?
Any committer have win 2003?
I think that it may be hard to find a test at this point that fails on
Windows Server 2003, but passes on XP. But perf etc.
Rana Dasgupta wrote:
On 10/16/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So since I don't have Win 2003, I gotta just commit and let someone else
test?
Any committer have win 2003?
I think that it may be hard to find a test at this point that fails on
Windows Server 2003, but passes
44 matches
Mail list logo
