Re: [9] RFR (M) 8054386: Allow Java debugging when CDS is enabled

[serguei.spit...@oracle.com]

I guess, there is no need to re-review.
It looks good anyway.

Thanks,
Serguei


On 6/4/15 4:32 PM, Chris Plummer wrote:

Hi David,

Here's an updated webrev:

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~cjplummer/8054386/webrev.04/

thanks,

Chris

On 6/3/15 11:29 PM, David Holmes wrote:

Hi Chris,

Hotspot change is good.

Only a couple of style nits with the tests (where are our Java style guidelines ???). Taking CDSJDITest.java as an example:

If you are okay with this line length:

115 public static OutputAnalyzer executeAndLog(ProcessBuilder pb, String logName) throws Exception {

then you can remove a number of line breaks in the headers of other functions. (I don't follow the 70-80 char line length dogma ;) )

If you do break a header of a function the { still stays on the same line as the last header component ie:

private static void addToClassList(PrintStream ps, String classes[])

         throws IOException {

not:

139 private static void addToClassList(PrintStream ps, String classes[])

 140         throws IOException
 141     {

Cheers,
David

On 2/06/2015 5:36 PM, Chris Plummer wrote:

[Adding core-libs-dev@openjdk.java.net since this update includes
changes to jdk/test library code]

Please review the updated webrev:

Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~cjplummer/8054386/webrev.02/
Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8054386

There were concerns about the new hotspot tests referencing jdk tests.
One concern was that if the jdk tests change, they could break the

hotspot tests, and this might initially go undetected. The other concern

is that if the jdk and hotspot tests are placed in separate test
bundles, then it would not be possible to run the hotspot tests.

Because of these concerns, I moved the tests that were in
hotspot/test/runtime/CDSJDITests to instead be in
jdk/test/com/sun/jdi/CDSJDITests. There was a slight renaming of the
tests in the process. Also, I had to update the jdk version of
ProcessTool.java to include the createJavaProcessBuilder() variant that
is in the hotspot version of ProcessTool.java.

Lastly, in CDSJITTest.java I changed:

     OutputAnalyzer output = new OutputAnalyzer(pb.start());

to instead be:

     OutputAnalyzer output = ProcessTools.executeProcess(pb);

I had to do this since the jdk version of the OutputAnalyzer constructor

is not public. The 1st version is what is commonly used in hostspot
tests, and the 2nd version is what is commonly used in jdk tests. I
decided to adopt the jdk way rather than make the OutputAnalyzer
constructors public, although this will probably happen eventually when
the two versions are unified.

thanks,

Chris


On 5/19/15 7:25 AM, Chris Plummer wrote:

Hi,

Please review the following changes for allowing java debugging when
CDS is enabled.

Webrev:http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~cjplummer/8054386/webrev.01/
Bug:https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8054386

The VM changes are simple. I removed the check that prevents debugging
with CDS enabled, and added logic that will map the CDS archive RW
when debugging is enabled.

The tests are a bit more complex. There are a bunch of existing JDI
tests for testing debugging support. Rather than start from scratch or
clone them, I instead just wrote wrapper tests that put the relevant
JDI test classes in the archive, and then invoke the JDI test. I did
this for 3 of the JDI tests. If you feel there are others that would
be good candidates, I'd be happy to add them. I'm looking for ones
that would result in modification of the RO class metadata, such as
setting a breakpoint (for which I already added two tests).

Testing done:
-Using JPRT to run the new jtreg tests on all platforms.
-Using JPRT to run all jtreg runtime tests on linux x86 and x_64.
-Regular JPRT "-testset hotspot" run
-Putting the JCK JVMTI tests in the archive and then running them.
-Putting the nsk jdb, jdwp, jvmti, and jdi tests in the archive and
then running them.
-Putting a simple test class in the archive and then setting a
breakpoint on it using jdb

Some of the above testing resulted in the discovery of bugs that still
need to be addressed: JDK-8078644, JDK-8078730, and JDK-8079181.

I also verified that without the change to map the archive RW, the
above testing resulted in a SEGV, which is what you would expect (and
actually want to see to prove that the testing is effective).

thanks,

Chris