On 9/26/07, Stepan Mishura <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 9/25/07, Xiao-Feng Li <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi, Stepan and folks, > > > > After looking at the testing results in the page given below, I feel > > the status of the revisionon X86-64 is quite "good". It is not > > perfect, but better than I expected. I'd suggest we consider to > > include X86-64 into our M3 build this time. It's an acceptable > > starting baseline, and we can improve it and will see better situation > > with M4, M5, etc. > > > > How do you guys think? > > > > Yes, I agree that it looks quite good. I think it is possible to > release it but I think we should be aware about its status (i.e. > quality) - it is less tested and results are worse then for x86. If we > want to release it then IMHO that all testing results available should > be reviewed and summary of existing problems should be created. If > there are no blocking issues for x86_64 release then I think it can be > released. (Why not?) > I assume that most of the folks are looking into x86 failres first.. > So if you volunteer to review testing results for x86_64 that would be > great!
Stepan, my suggestion was to take current status as the starting baseline for X86-64. We don't need spend additional time for any failures specific to X86-64 this time. In my last email, I mentioned that I had checked the "must-pass" tests and thought they are ok. I never engaged in a releasing procedure, so I don't know what are considered to be "blocking issues", and what kind of summary we need. Do you mean the list of failures? Thanks, xiaofeng > Thanks, > Stepan. > > > Btw, The caveat for the X86-64 build is, they can only support up to > > 4GB heap size currently. Hopefully this will be changed in M4 or M5. > > > > PS, I checked the results in Linux64 for those "must pass" tests, such > > as Dacapo and "DRLVM tests". I found the two failures in "DRLVM tests" > > are "failures" rather than "errors", which I guess are actually > > time-out. The failure in Dacapo is with Chart, showing a null pointer > > in AWT. I personally think we can leave it as is for M3. > > > > Thanks, > > xiaofeng > > > > > > On 9/25/07, Stepan Mishura <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On 9/24/07, Stepan Mishura <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > On 9/22/07, Stepan Mishura wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > According to the plan - Sept. 22 is code freeze date for M3 so let's > > > > > follow policy: > > > > > "no more commits please without agreement from two committers on the > > > > > dev list." > > > > > > > > > > Let's do more testing and analyze if there any critical/blocker issues > > > > > for consideration. > > > > > Please raise here issues that you think MUST be fixed for M3. > > > > > > > > Here is [1] the status of the last snapshot (r578410) that includes > > > > last classlib updates. Unfortunately, not everything is green there. > > > > I'm going to inspect all results to make sure that there are no > > > > failures caused by CC configuration issues. > > > > > > > > > > I've compared testing status for the last snapshot r578410 [1] with M2 > > > [2][3]. > > > > > > We have the following short status for failed suites: > > > > > > Windows_x86: > > > * classlib: 2 tests from pack200 module fail on snapshot (but pass > > > on debug build) > > > * Eclipse unit tests 3.2: there is no tests report like for M3. The > > > pass rate was improved from 99.32%[3] to 99.7%[1] > > > * Eclipse unit tests 3.3 are new and the pass rate is 99.77%. I > > > think is acceptable > > > * EGA x48 hours scenario fails. According to [4] it passed on M2. > > > * Functional: need more analysis, currently I see that 2 tests were > > > enabled and new 15 regressions. > > > * Geronimo: 2 regressions > > > * JDK tools: 1 test failed. It might be intermediate failure - the > > > test failed due to timeout > > > * Reliability: 65 tests passed for M2 and 64 for M3. Investigation > > > is required. > > > * Stress: 190 tests passed for M2 and 189 for M3. Investigation is > > > required. > > > > > > Linux_x86: > > > * classlib: 2 tests from pack200 (as for Windows), 1 luni tests > > > failed and 1 crash of security test > > > * Eclipse unit tests 3.2: 2 suites crashed so pass rate is 69.60%. I > > > assume this may be CC host configuration issue. Going to investigate. > > > * Eclipse unit tests 3.3 are new and the pass rate is 96.47%. I > > > think is acceptable > > > * EGA x48 hours scenario: the same as for Windows (scenario fails on M3) > > > * Functional: need more analysis, similar to Windows - some test are > > > passing now but there are new failures. > > > * Geronimo: 2 regressions (the same as for Windows) > > > * Reliability: need more analysis > > > * Stress: need more analysis > > > > > > As I remember Sean took pack200 tests. And Alexei Zakharov took > > > security test crash. > > > I'm going to sort things out with Eclipse unit tests 3.2 crash on > > > Linux. And to look info failed jdktools test. > > > > > > So volunteers are required for: EGAx48, Geronimo, functional, > > > reliability and stress suites. > > > > > > Also we have 2 JIRAs to be resolved for M3 under milstone unmblella[5]: > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-4844 > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-4810 > > > > > > [1] > > > http://people.apache.org/~mloenko/snapshot_testing/script/r578410/index.html > > > [2] > > > http://people.apache.org/~mloenko/snapshot_testing/script/r551077/index.html > > > [3] http://wiki.apache.org/harmony/milestones/M2 > > > [4] > > > http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/harmony-dev/200706.mbox/[EMAIL > > > PROTECTED] > > > [5] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-4843 > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Stepan. > > > > > > > > > > Please feel free to pick up any issue for investigation. For example, > > > > 2 pack200 classlib test failed. Also there is a crash of > > > > org.apache.harmony.security.tests.java.security.cert.serialization.CertificateTest > > > > on Linux x86 > > > > > > > > BTW, should we consider BTI's workspace (that we use for M3 testing) > > > > frozen too? > > > > > > > > [1] > > > > http://people.apache.org/~mloenko/snapshot_testing/script/r578410/index.html > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Stepan. > > > > > > > > > -- > > http://xiao-feng.blogspot.com > > > -- http://xiao-feng.blogspot.com
