On Mon, 15 Jan 2024 11:05:09 GMT, Aleksey Shipilev <sh...@openjdk.org> wrote:
> Since recent work to improve `tier4` performance, we actually test
> `tier{1,2,3,4}` often, which includes all the tests in current tree. It would
> be more convenient to just have the `all` test group/alias, so that we can do
> `make test TEST=all`. This also gives a parallelism / run time benefit, as we
> do not wait for tests in each tier to complete before moving to next tier.
>
> Sample run on out-of-the-box Linux x86_64 fastdebug is below. For some
> environments one also needs to supply a few keywords like `!printer` to skip
> tests that cannot complete without failure due to misconfiguration. I left
> the keywords as is to show how would a failing run look. There is also an
> existing shortcut in build system that allows to run this with `make
> test-all`.
>
>
> % make test TEST=all
>
> Test selection 'all', will run:
> * jtreg:test/hotspot/jtreg:all
> * jtreg:test/jdk:all
> * jtreg:test/langtools:all
> * jtreg:test/jaxp:all
> * jtreg:test/lib-test:all
>
> (...about 6 hours later...)
>
> ==============================
> Test summary
> ==============================
> TEST TOTAL PASS FAIL ERROR
>
>>> jtreg:test/hotspot/jtreg:all 6731 6702 29 0 <<
>>> jtreg:test/jdk:all 9962 9951 11 0 <<
> jtreg:test/langtools:all 4469 4469 0 0
>
> jtreg:test/jaxp:all 513 513 0 0
>
> jtreg:test/lib-test:all 32 32 0 0
>
> ==============================
> TEST FAILURE
Okay - change is harmless with no ongoing maintenance cost.
test/jdk/TEST.groups line 28:
> 26: #
> 27:
> 28: all = \
Why no `jdk_all` definition in this case?
-------------
Marked as reviewed by dholmes (Reviewer).
PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/17422#pullrequestreview-1822313872
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/17422#discussion_r1452781088
