On Thu, 8 May 2025 14:51:24 GMT, Leo Korinth <lkori...@openjdk.org> wrote:
> This change tries to add timeout to individual testcases so that I am able to > run them with a timeout factor of 1 in the future (JDK-8260555). > > The first commit changes the timeout factor to 0.7, so that I can run tests > and test the change (it will finally be changed to 1.0 in JDK-8260555). The > next commit excludes some junit/testng tests where I can currently not change > the timeout factor (CODETOOLS-7903961). Both these commits will be reverted > before integrating the change. I will also apply copyright updates after the > review. > > In addition to changing the timeout factor, I am also using a library call to > parse the timeout factor from the java properties (I can not use the library > function everywhere as jtreg does not allow me to add @library notations to > non testcase files). > > My approach has been to run all test, and afterwards updating those that > fails due to a timeout factor. The amount of updated testcases is huge, and > my strategy has been to quadruple the timeout if I could not directly see > that less was needed (thus the timeout will be the same after JDK-8260555 is > implemented). In a few places I have added a bit more timeout so that it will > work with the 0.7 timeout factor. > > These fixes have been created when I have plown through testcases: > JDK-8352719: Add an equals sign to the modules statement > JDK-8352709: Remove bad timing annotations from WhileOpTest.java > JDK-8352074: Test MemoryLeak.java seems not to test what it is supposed to > test > CODETOOLS-7903937: JTREG uses timeout factor on socket timeout but not on > KEEPALIVE > CODETOOLS-7903961: Make default timeout configurable > > Sometime in the future I will also fix: > 8260555: Change the default TIMEOUT_FACTOR from 4 to 1 > > for which I am awaiting: > CODETOOLS-7903961 that is fixed in jtreg 7.6, but we are still running 7.5.1+1 > > *After the review I will revert the two first commits, and update the > copyrights* Thanks for tackling this! I look forward to the day when you change TIMEOUT_FACTOR to be 1 by default. I think that will reduce confusion. I made a cursory look through some GC files and I think that looked good. doc/testing.md line 385: > 383: (`-timeoutFactor`). Also, some test cases that programmatically wait a > 384: certain amount of time will apply this factor. If we run in > 385: interpreted mode (`-Xcomp`), [RunTest.gmk](../make/RunTests.gmk) Maybe Suggestion: interpreted mode (`-Xint`), [RunTest.gmk](../make/RunTests.gmk) ------------- PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/25122#pullrequestreview-2825661242 PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/25122#discussion_r2080028720
