It's correct to throw SOE. But test prints FAIL. Pavel
On 12/11/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'm having trouble following this. How do you define "failure"? Isn't it correct to throw a SOE? geir Elena Semukhina wrote: > On 12/11/06, Pavel Afremov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> Elena, >> >> >> >> You wrote: >> >> RI*: 3689 >> >> >> >> It's mean that test is failed on RI, isn't it? >> >> So 7000 isn't correct for RI. Let's change it to 3000. And test start's >> pass >> on our VM. > > > It will fail in the interpreter mode :(. > > Since this functionality depends on implementation, the test may pass here > and fail there. > I'd like to hear from DRLVM gurus that e.g. the test is incorrect because > the stack size limit in the DRLVM is restricted to some value which cause > StackOverflowError and the correct number in the test should be XXX. I know > that 200 is acceptable :) but should it be larger? > > Elena > > Pavel. > > > On 12/11/06, Elena Semukhina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> Pavel, >> >> what is incorrect in the test? >> >> It passes on windows on IBM VME and JRockit. As for the magic number >> 7000, >> I >> think the author of the test considered it quite satisfactory . In the >> comments to the test he wrote that an alternative java craches with >> 200000:). >> >> The JVM Spec reads: >> * If the computation in a thread requires a larger Java virtual machine >> stack than is permitted, the Java virtual machine throws a >> StackOverflowError. >> >> So throwing StackOverflowError is legal and the stack size limit depends >> on >> implementation. The question is whether the test has to pass on the >> current >> DRLVM implementation. If it fails legally, then we should fix the test so >> that it reflects the status quo. >> >> Thanks, >> Elena >> >> On 12/11/06, Pavel Afremov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > >> > I think that test is invalid. It doesn't pass on windows RI , so … no >> > comments. Also it is not clear why depth should be 7000. I can find >> this >> > magic value in any spec. >> > >> > Pavel Afremov. >> > >> > >> > >> > On 12/11/06, Elena Semukhina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > > >> > > Hello all, >> > > >> > > The smoke test stress.Stack fails with StackOverflowError on Windows >> and >> > > linux/INT. It passes only on linux/JIT now. >> > > The test algorithm is simple: a method calls itself recursively for >> 7000 >> > > times. The test fails if StackOverflowError is thrown. >> > > >> > > The following are the numbers of iterations before the test fails: >> > > >> > > Windows: >> > > INT: 353 >> > > JET: 3963 >> > > OPT: 32264 >> > > RI*: 3689 >> > > >> > > Linux: >> > > INT: 587 >> > > JET: 7762 >> > > OPT: 72105 (!!!) >> > > RI*: 61837 >> > > >> > > *RI is Java(TM) 2 Runtime Environment, Standard Edition (build >> > > 1.5.0_08-b03 >> > > ). >> > > >> > > Are these numbers expected? Are there any restrictions on stack size >> in >> > > DRLVM? >> > > >> > > -- >> > > Thanks, >> > > Elena >> > > >> > > >> > >> > >> >> >> -- >> Thanks, >> Elena >> >> > > > > >
