All looks good. Thanks.
On 7 Nov 2014, at 12:14, Pavel Rappo <pavel.ra...@oracle.com> wrote: > Hi everyone, > > Could you please review my change for JDK-8059311? > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~prappo/8059311/webrev.00/ > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > It looks like one of the "killSwitches" went off and executed System.exit(0). > The problem is jtreg doesn't like System.exit and treats it as a test failure > (http://openjdk.java.net/jtreg/faq.html#question7.1): > > "...Tests are not allowed to call System.exit because the test must have the > ability to run in the same JVM as the harness. Calling System.exit while the > test is running in this manner would cause the harness itself to exit..." > > Moreover, the purpose of the "killSwitch" is not clear. It seems to be > ensuring the test won't hang by killing JVM after a certain timeout. > First of all, if the test hangs -- it means we have a problem to investigate > and the "killSwitch" is just masking it. If it doesn't hang -- there's no > need for a "killSwitch". > > If the test hangs it will be noticed by jtreg > (http://openjdk.java.net/jtreg/tag-spec.txt): > > "... /timeout=<seconds> > > Specify the timeout value. The default timeout is two minutes. If an action > does not finish before the timeout expires, it fails..." > > Thus if we remove the "killSwitch" we treat the problem of slow systems > (where killSwitch timeout was too small) and at the same time will be > notified if test hangs. > > Thanks > -Pavel
