Re: RFR(XS) : 8144695 : --disable-warnings-as-errors does not work for HotSpot build

t; # When using compiler version 5.13 (Solaris Studio 12.4), calls to explicitly > # instantiated template functions trigger this warning when +w is active. — Igor > On Dec 17, 2015, at 1:09 AM, Igor Ignatyev <igor.ignat...@oracle.com> wrote: > >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~

RFR(XS) : 8144695 : --disable-warnings-as-errors does not work for HotSpot build

> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev/8144695/webrev.00/ 11 lines changed: 4 ins; 0 del; 7 mod; Hi, could you please review the fix for 8144695[1]? 8141543[1] propagated --disable-warnings-as-errors to hotspot build by setting WARNINGS_ARE_ERRORS to empty line. however in hotspot makefiles

Re: RFR(XS) : 8144695 : --disable-warnings-as-errors does not work for HotSpot build

> On Dec 17, 2015, at 2:10 AM, Kim Barrett <kim.barr...@oracle.com> wrote: > > On Dec 16, 2015, at 5:54 PM, Igor Ignatyev <igor.ignat...@oracle.com> wrote: >> >> as Mikael V correctly pointed out, there is missed $( ) in solaris/adlc. >> here is the new

Re: RFR(XS) : 8144695 : --disable-warnings-as-errors does not work for HotSpot build

, 2015, at 8:22 AM, Igor Ignatyev <igor.ignat...@oracle.com> wrote: >> >> >>> On Dec 17, 2015, at 2:10 AM, Kim Barrett <kim.barr...@oracle.com> wrote: >>> make/solaris/makefiles/adlc.make >>> 77 WARNINGS_ARE_ERRORS ?= -w -xwe >>> >

Re: RFR(XS) : 8144695 : --disable-warnings-as-errors does not work for HotSpot build

Kim, Magnus, Thank you for review. — Igor > On Feb 9, 2016, at 12:54 PM, Magnus Ihse Bursie > <magnus.ihse.bur...@oracle.com> wrote: > > On 2016-02-08 20:37, Kim Barrett wrote: >>> On Feb 7, 2016, at 4:22 PM, Igor Ignatyev <igor.ignat...@oracle.com> wrote: &g

Re: RFR: 8171366 macOS: Do not run failure handler commands that require Developer mode access

Looks good to me. Thanks, — Igor > On Dec 16, 2016, at 5:10 PM, Staffan Larsen wrote: > > Good point. New webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sla/8171366/webrev.01/ > > > Thanks! > >> On 16 Dec 2016, at 15:05,

RFR(XXS) : 8172094 : 8171433 changes in generated-configure should be restored

Hi all, could you please review this tiny fix which restores 8171433 changes in generated-configure file? the changes were lost during latest hs<->dev merge. I’ve regenerated them by runing common/autoconf/autogen.sh. JBS: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8172094 webrev:

Re: RFR(XS): 8184772 - Make it possible to pass arguments only to the Java running the tests when running jtreg through make

Hi Christian, the fix looks good to me. Thanks, -- Igor > On Aug 14, 2017, at 4:39 AM, Christian Tornqvist > wrote: > > Hi everyone, > > Please review this small change that enables passing options only to the Java > under test when running jtreg through

Re: RFR(L) : 8199370: [TESTBUG] Open source vm testbase GC tests

Erik, Magnus, thank you for reviewing build change. can someone from GC people Review the rest? -- Igor > On May 8, 2018, at 2:06 AM, Magnus Ihse Bursie > <magnus.ihse.bur...@oracle.com> wrote: > > On 2018-05-08 00:35, Igor Ignatyev wrote: >> http://cr.openjdk.jav

RFR(L) : 8199370: [TESTBUG] Open source vm testbase GC tests

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev/8199370/webrev.00/index.html > 45710 lines changed: 45710 ins; 0 del; 0 mod; Hi all, could you please review the patch which open sources GC tests from vm testbase? it introduces the following test groups: - vmTestbase_vm_g1classunloading -

RFR(L) : 8199384 : [TESTBUG] Open source VM testbase MLVM tests

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev//8199384/webrev.00/index.html > 61414 lines changed: 61414 ins; 0 del; 0 mod; Hi all, could you please review this patch which open sources MLVM tests from VM testbase? these tests were developed in early days of JSR292 to test different aspects of

Re: RFR(L) : 8199370: [TESTBUG] Open source vm testbase GC tests

Hi Erik, please see my answers inline. can I consider this RFR as reviewed by you? Thanks, -- Igor > On May 14, 2018, at 4:23 AM, Erik Helin <erik.he...@oracle.com> wrote: > > On 05/08/2018 12:35 AM, Igor Ignatyev wrote: >> Hi all, > > Hi Igor, > > On 0

RFR(M) : 8199380 : [TESTBUG] Open source VM testbase AOD tests

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev/8199380/webrev.00/ > 2370 lines changed: 2370 ins; 0 del; 0 mod; Hi all, could you please review this patch which open sources AOD tests from VM testbase? these tests test hotspot's attach-on-demand. As usually w/ VM testbase code, these tests are old,

Re: RFR(L): 8199255: [TESTBUG] Open source VM testbase default methods tests

Hi Misha, looks good to me. -- Igor > On May 23, 2018, at 4:13 PM, mikhailo wrote: > > Hi Calvin, > > Thank you for review. I will fix the issue with vmTestbase_nsk_stress > (merge issue) and will remove the blank line at line 1273 prior to check in. > > >

RFR(XL) : 8199383 : [TESTBUG] Open source VM testbase JVMTI tests

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev//8199383/webrev.00/index.html > 308253 lines changed: 308253 ins; 0 del; 0 mod; Hi all, could you please review this patch which open sources JVMTI tests from VM testbase? As usually w/ VM testbase code, these tests are old, they have been run in hotspot

Re: RFR(L) : 8199370: [TESTBUG] Open source vm testbase GC tests

iled with warnings as errors. We think this > should get fixed. > > Best regards, > Martin > > > -Original Message- > From: hotspot-gc-dev [mailto:hotspot-gc-dev-boun...@openjdk.java.net] On > Behalf Of Igor Ignatyev > Sent: Dienstag, 15. Mai 2018 20:59 > To

Re: RFR(XXS): 8206113: Troubles configuring graal tests

/JDK-8206135 > > Vladimir > >> Thanks, >> David >>> JBS: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8206113 >>> webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~epavlova//8206113/webrev.00/index.html >>> >>> thanks, >>> -katya >>> >>> p.s. >>> Igor Ignatyev volunteered to sponsor this change.

Re: RFR(XXS): 8206113: Troubles configuring graal tests

> On Jul 2, 2018, at 3:52 PM, Vladimir Kozlov > wrote: > > On 7/2/18 3:28 PM, Igor Ignatyev wrote: >> Vladimir, >> there are two different configure-time problems: >> - 1st is ability to get unbuildable configuration w/ AOT but w/o JVMCI >> - 2nd is not

RFR(L) : 8199375 : [TESTBUG] Open source vm testbase monitoring tests

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev//8199375/webrev.00/index.html > 41276 lines changed: 41274 ins; 1 del; 1 mod; Hi all, could you please review the patch which open sources monitoring tests from vm testbase? The tests were developed to test hotspot related JMX functionality. as w/ common

Re: RFR(L) : 8199375 : [TESTBUG] Open source vm testbase monitoring tests

gt;>> >>> Igor, >>> >>> Why you need to list each test in TEST.groups and not just directory as we >>> do in other cases? >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Vladimir >>> >>>> On 5/1/18 7:10 PM, Igor Ignatyev wrot

Re: RFR(L) : 8199643 : [TESTBUG] Open source common VM testbase code

Jerry, Misha, thank you for your review. adding build-dev alias as the patch includes makefiles changes. -- Igor > On Apr 30, 2018, at 8:39 AM, mikhailo wrote: > > Changes look good to me, > > Thank you, > > Misha > > > On 04/28/2018 07:34 AM, Gerald

RFR(L) : 8199382 : [TESTBUG] Open source VM testbase JDI tests

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev/8199382/webrev.00/index.html > 577169 lines changed: 577169 ins; 0 del; 0 mod; Hi all, could you please review the patch which open sources JDI tests from vm testbase? These tests cover different aspects of JDI implementation. As usually w/ VM testbase

Re: RFR(S): 8197906: Enable CDS mode execution of jtreg tests via make

is OK as is. If not, I will change it > and rerun the tests. Please let me know. > > > Thank you, > Misha > > > On 2/13/18, 8:41 PM, Igor Ignatyev wrote: >> Hi Misha, >> >> have you check that it works on windows w/ GENERATE_CDS_ARCHIVE=true?

Re: RFR(S) 8197453 : Add support of extra problem list

ISTS. > testing in Graal mode with EXTRA_PROBLEM_LISTS=ProblemList-graal.txt > > thanks, > -katya > > p.s. > Igor Ignatyev volunteered to sponsor this change.

RFR(XXS) : 8208647 : switch jtreg to 4.2b13

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev/8208647/webrev.00/index.html > 5 lines changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 5 mod; Hi all, could you please review this small fix which switches jtreg to the latest available build? due to changes in javatest API, failure_handler had to be slightly updated. webrev:

Re: RFR(XXS) : 8208647 : switch jtreg to 4.2b13

> On Aug 1, 2018, at 10:33 PM, David Holmes wrote: > > Hi Igor, > > On 2/08/2018 5:42 AM, Igor Ignatyev wrote: >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev/8208647/webrev.00/index.html >>> 5 lines changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 5 mod; >> Hi all, >> could you p

RFR(M/L) : 8209611 : use C++ compiler for hotspot tests

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev//8209611/webrev.01/index.html > 11160 lines changed: 879 ins; 61 del; 10220 mod; Hi all, could you please review the patch which moves all hotspot native test code to C++? this will guarantee that we always use C++ compilers for them (as an opposite to

Re: RFR(M/L) : 8209611 : use C++ compiler for hotspot tests

mk. Cheers, -- Igor > > Thanks, > David > >> Thanks, >> — Igor >> On Aug 20, 2018, at 6:43 PM, David Holmes > <mailto:david.hol...@oracle.com>> wrote: >>> Hi Igor, >>> >>> On 21/08/2018 8:59 AM, Igor Ignatyev wrote: >>>

Re: RFR(M/L) : 8209611 : use C++ compiler for hotspot tests

Hi David, thanks for looking at the webrev and all your comments. my answers are inlined. enjoy your vacation! -- Igor > On Aug 21, 2018, at 9:28 PM, David Holmes wrote: > > Hi Igor, > > On 22/08/2018 9:04 AM, Igor Ignatyev wrote: >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignaty

Re: RFR(M/L) : 8209611 : use C++ compiler for hotspot tests

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev//8209611/webrev.02/index.html <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev//8209611/webrev.02/index.html> is a new version of patch, which moves only vmTestbase tests. Thanks, -- Igor > On Aug 20, 2018, at 11:07 PM, Igor Ignatyev wrote: > >

Re: RFR(M/L) : 8209611 : use C++ compiler for hotspot tests

gt; now looks like we have a new pattern of source files/directories that turns >> into native libraries, and we could of course create a new macro that >> automatically generates compilation setups for them as well (given that file >> or directory names makes it possible to autom

Re: RFR(M/L) : 8209611 : use C++ compiler for hotspot tests

st leads to big > reshufflings whenever a command line changes, with little gain in > readability. Instead, just indent the line following the \ with four more > spaces (and no tabs!). (See > http://openjdk.java.net/groups/build/doc/code-conventions.html) sure thing, I'll remove all

Re: RFR(M/L) : 8209611 : use C++ compiler for hotspot tests

Hi Erik, thanks for your review! -- Igor > On Aug 28, 2018, at 9:01 AM, Erik Joelsson wrote: > > Hello, > > I have nothing to add in addition to Magnus' comments. If that is fixed, this > looks good from a build point of view. > > /Erik > > > On 2018

Re: RFR(M/L) : 8209611 : use C++ compiler for hotspot tests

happens, so I'd be happy to see us tackle it in a second/third step. > > So looks good to me and thanks for doing it! > Jc > > On Tue, Aug 21, 2018 at 9:58 PM Igor Ignatyev <mailto:igor.ignat...@oracle.com>> wrote: > Hi David, > > thanks for looking at the webre

Re: RFR: 8208157: requires.VMProps throws NPE for missing properties in "release" file

looks good to me. -- Igor > On Jul 24, 2018, at 3:48 PM, Alexandre (Shura) Iline > wrote: > > Hi, > > Could you please tale a quick look on this simple fix? > > diff --git a/test/jtreg-ext/requires/VMProps.java > b/test/jtreg-ext/requires/VMProps.java > ---

Re: 8209520: Build fails when native code coverage is enabled

Hi, my claim was based on the warnings which we were getting when we just introduced code coverage builds in JDK 9, e.g. 8130790[1] (clobbered warning in libt2k). these warnings haven't been seen w/o code coverage enabled, and enabling coverage changes code path, so I don't think we should

Re: 8209520: Build fails when native code coverage is enabled

Hi Magnus, herein I will be talking only about 1st two warnings. although your analyze is correct, it doesn't take into account the fact that the warnings report situations that can't happen in current codebase, and gcc doesn't report them in our "regular" builds b/c it can proof that - in

RFR(S/M) [trivial] 8206429 : [REDO] 8202561 clean up TEST.groups

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev//8206429/webrev.00/index.html > 243 lines changed: 0 ins; 124 del; 119 mod; Hi all, could you please review this redo of 8202561? 8202561 was backed out b/c our CI infra didn't support multiple test group files. now such configurations are supported, so

Re: RFR(S/M) [trivial] 8206429 : [REDO] 8202561 clean up TEST.groups

ou were able re-test it to verify that it actually > works. Not like last time. > > Thanks, > Vladimir > > On 7/5/18 1:02 PM, Igor Ignatyev wrote: >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev//8206429/webrev.00/index.html >>> 243 lines changed: 0 ins; 124 del; 1

Re: RFR: JDK-8199352: The Jib artifact resolver in test lib needs to print better error messages

Hi Erik, to avoid incompatibility, you could have just made ArtifactResolverException a subclass of java.io.FileNotFoundException. it seems you forgot to add ArtifactResolverException.java file to the repo. a minor nit: in JibArtifactManager::newInstance, you pass "Could not resolve " +

Re: RFR: JDK-8199352: The Jib artifact resolver in test lib needs to print better error messages

Looks good to me. -- Igor > On Mar 8, 2018, at 4:06 PM, Erik Joelsson <erik.joels...@oracle.com> wrote: > > On 2018-03-08 15:24, Igor Ignatyev wrote: >> Hi Erik, > Thanks for looking at this! >> to avoid incompatibility, you could have just made ArtifactRe

RFR(XXS) : 8200538 : cl : Command line warning D9014 : invalid value '2220' for '/wd'

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev/8200538/webrev.00/ > 1 line changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 1 mod; Hi all, could you please review this one-liner change which removes C2220 from disabled warning on windows? C2220 is "warning treated as error" compiler error, which isn't a real compiler

Re: RFR(XXS) : 8200180 : fix a typo in run-test framework documentation

> This looks good, but please also run "make update-build-docs" so that the >> html file also gets regenerated before pushing. > > Looks good to me too. > > /Magnus > >> >> /Erik >> >> >>> On 2018-03-23 08:13, Igor Ignatyev wr

RFR(XXS) : 8200180 : fix a typo in run-test framework documentation

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev//8200180/webrev.00/index.html > 3 lines changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 3 mod; Hi all, could you please review this small fix for run-test framework documentation? VM_OTIONS was used instead of VM_OPTIONS at several places, the fix is obvious

Re: RFR(S) 8197453 : Add support of extra problem list

these new problem-list files are destined for use by jtreg, I would > encourage adding a platform specifier on each line, after the bug number. If > you want to mark the test as excluded on all platforms, the convention is to > use "generic-all". > > -- Jon >

Re: RFR(S) 8197453 : Add support of extra problem list

2 PM, Jonathan Gibbons wrote: >> If these new problem-list files are destined for use by jtreg, I would >> encourage adding a platform specifier on each line, after the bug number. If >> you want to mark the test as excluded on all platforms, the convention is to >> use

Re: RFR(XXS) : 8206088 : 8205207 broke builds

Erik, Katya, thank you for such fast reviews. Cheers, -- Igor > On Jun 28, 2018, at 9:56 PM, Erik Helin wrote: > > On 06/29/2018 06:55 AM, Igor Ignatyev wrote: >> Hi Erik, >> actually, I have a redundant quotation mark at the begging, removed. thanks >> for

Re: RFR(XXS) : 8206088 : 8205207 broke builds

Hi Erik, actually, I have a redundant quotation mark at the begging, removed. thanks for spotting this. Thanks, -- Igor > On Jun 28, 2018, at 9:50 PM, Erik Helin wrote: > > On 06/29/2018 06:42 AM, Igor Ignatyev wrote: >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev//8206088/webre

RFR(XXS) : 8206088 : 8205207 broke builds

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev//8206088/webrev.00/index.html > 1 line changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 1 mod; Hi all, could you please review this one liner fix? webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev//8206088/webrev.00/index.html JBS: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8206088

Re: RFR(S): remove ExecuteInternalVMTests and VerboseInternalVMTests flags

t; all uses should just be deleted ... unless you plan on adding some other form > of logging for this? > > Thanks, > David > > On 2/11/2018 7:15 AM, Igor Ignatyev wrote: >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev//8213058/webrev.00/index.html >>> 174 lines changed: 0 in

RFR(S): remove ExecuteInternalVMTests and VerboseInternalVMTests flags

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev//8213058/webrev.00/index.html > 174 lines changed: 0 ins; 170 del; 4 mod; Hi all, could you please review this small clean up which removes ExecuteInternalVMTests and VerboseInternalVMTests flags and related make targets and tests? 8177708[1-3] is to

Re: RFR(S): remove ExecuteInternalVMTests and VerboseInternalVMTests flags

ed due to rebasing. Erik, could you please re-review build changes? http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev//8213058/webrev.01/ <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev//8213058/webrev.01/> is the whole webrev. Thanks, -- Igor > On Nov 1, 2018, at 4:23 PM, Igor Ignatyev wrote

Re: RFR(S): remove ExecuteInternalVMTests and VerboseInternalVMTests flags

_TESTS += failure-handler make > > > > On Nov 2, 2018, at 1:27 AM, Magnus Ihse Bursie > wrote: > > > On 2018-11-02 00:37, Igor Ignatyev wrote: >> on a second though, removing these macros isn't that big, here is an >> incremental web

Re: [13] RFR (S): 8217404: --with-jvm-features doesn't work when multiple features are explicitly disabled

Hi Vladimir, overall your fix looks reasonable, but w/ it we can get unintentionally disabled features (b/c grep doesn't do full word match). although this problem wasn't really introduced by your fix, I think it's be better to fix it as a part of your patch. I see two possible solutions: -

Re: RFR: JDK-8217613: [AOT] TEST_OPTS_AOT_MODULES doesn't work on mac

Hi Erik, I don't like that it's based on the assumption that ld and clang/gcc are in the same directory, but this assumption seems to be always true for now. so unless there is an easy way to get ld path, I'm fine w/ this fix. -- Igor > On Jan 23, 2019, at 1:18 PM, Vladimir Kozlov > wrote:

Re: RFR(S) : 8219395 : integrate gcov w/ run-test

> done unnecessarily. I would recommend explicitly setting the > default_make_targets (which would be product-bundles and test-bundles) for > the new *-gcov profiles. > > On lines 795, 804 and 812 you seem to have left commented out code that > should probably be removed. &g

Re: RFR(T) : 8219132 : switch to jtreg4.2-b14

all hotspot tests. [1] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8219408 <https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8219408> [2] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8219140 <https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8219140> Thanks, -- Igor > On Feb 19, 2019, at 5:06 PM, Ig

RFR(T) : 8219132 : switch to jtreg4.2-b14

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev//8219132/webrev.00/index.html > 1 line changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 1 mod; Hi all, could you please review this one-liner which switch jtreg version to jtreg4.2-b14? webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev//8219132/webrev.00/index.html JBS:

Re: RFR(T) : 8219132 : switch to jtreg4.2-b14

e: > > Looks good. > > Do we need to also bump the required version in the TEST.ROOT files? > > /Erik > > On 2019-02-19 16:34, Igor Ignatyev wrote: >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev//8219132/webrev.00/index.html >>> 1 line changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 1 mod;

RFR(S) : 8219395 : integrate gcov w/ run-test

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev//8219395/webrev.00/index.html > 65 lines changed: 59 ins; 0 del; 6 mod; Hi all, could you please review the patch which makes it easy to run tests on the builds w/ native-code-coverage enabled? to do so the patch - sets GCOV_PREFIX env. variable, so .gcda

Re: RFR(T) : 8219132 : switch to jtreg4.2-b14

ionArgs=true in 8219254. Thanks, -- Igor > On Feb 19, 2019, at 5:49 PM, Joseph D. Darcy wrote: > > Hello, > > On 2/19/2019 5:06 PM, Igor Ignatyev wrote: >> Hi Erik, >> >> thanks for your review. >> >> we can't just bump the required version as it can

Re: RFR(S) : 8219391 : extend gcov support to llvm/clang

thanks Erik, pushed. y, this means exactly that. -- Igor > On Feb 19, 2019, at 12:35 PM, Erik Joelsson wrote: > > Looks good. > > Does this mean it works on Macos? > > /Erik > > On 2019-02-19 11:46, Igor Ignatyev wrote: >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ii

RFR(S) : 8219391 : extend gcov support to llvm/clang

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev//8219391/webrev.00 > 21 lines changed: 3 ins; 0 del; 18 mod; Hi all, could you please review this small and trivial patch which allows usage of --enable-native-coverage configure option w/ clang devkit? > llvm/clang supports gcov in the same way gcc does,

Re: RFR: JDK-8217613: [AOT] TEST_OPTS_AOT_MODULES doesn't work on mac

~erikj/8217613/webrev.02/index.html > > Verified with local test using TEST_OPTS=AOT_MODULES=java.base on Macosx, > Linux and Windows, as well as mach5 run of the same. > > /Erik > > On 2019-01-23 15:55, Igor Ignatyev wrote: >> so far it has affected only my local runs, so

Re: RFR: JDK-8217613: [AOT] TEST_OPTS_AOT_MODULES doesn't work on mac

so far it has affected only my local runs, so we are in no hurry to get this fixed ;) you can work on a better fix, I, meanwhile, will apply your patch to my local ws as a workaround. -- Igor > On Jan 23, 2019, at 3:10 PM, Erik Joelsson wrote: > > On 2019-01-23 13:38, Igor Ignat

Re: RFR(L/XS) : 8222414 : bring googlemock v1.8.1

@Erik, Thanks! @hotspot (looking at Robin), can I get another review? -- Igor > On May 24, 2019, at 8:28 AM, Erik Joelsson wrote: > > Thanks, looks good! > > /Erik > > On 2019-05-23 19:07, Igor Ignatyev wrote: >> Hi Erik, >> >> thanks for your revie

Re: RFR(L/XS) : 8222414 : bring googlemock v1.8.1

gt; Robin > >> On 24 May 2019, at 23:33, Igor Ignatyev wrote: >> >> @Erik, Thanks! >> >> @hotspot (looking at Robin), can I get another review? >> >> -- Igor >> >>> On May 24, 2019, at 8:28 AM, Erik Joelsson wrote: >>> >

RFR(L/XS) : 8222414 : bring googlemock v1.8.1

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev//8222414/webrev.01 > 21638 lines changed: 21628 ins; 0 del; 10 mod; Hi all, could you please review this patch which makes mocking framework from google test available for hotspot tests? JBS: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8222414 testing: tier1

RFR(S) [13] : 8226910 : make it possible to use jtreg's -match via run-test framework

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev//8226910/webrev.00/index.html > 25 lines changed: 18 ins; 3 del; 4 mod; Hi all, could you please review this small patch which adds JTREG_RUN_PROBLEM_LISTS options to run-test framework? when JTREG_RUN_PROBLEM_LISTS is set to true, jtreg will use problem

Re: RFR(S) [13] : 8226910 : make it possible to use jtreg's -match via run-test framework

can I get a review for this patch? http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev//8226910/webrev.01/index.html <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev//8226910/webrev.01/index.html> Thanks, -- Igor > On Jul 6, 2019, at 11:50 AM, Igor Ignatyev wrote: > > Hi David, > >> On

Re: RFR(S) [13] : 8226910 : make it possible to use jtreg's -match via run-test framework

David, Misha, thanks for your review, pushed. -- Igor > On Jul 18, 2019, at 10:14 AM, mikhailo.seledt...@oracle.com wrote: > > +1 > > On 7/17/19 9:43 PM, David Holmes wrote: >> Hi Igor, >> >> This seems fine to me. >> >> Thanks, >> Davi

Re: RFR(S) [13] : 8226910 : make it possible to use jtreg's -match via run-test framework

ping? -- Igor > On Jun 27, 2019, at 3:25 PM, Igor Ignatyev wrote: > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev//8226910/webrev.00/index.html >> 25 lines changed: 18 ins; 3 del; 4 mod; > > Hi all, > > could you please review this small patch which adds JTREG_RUN_PROB

Re: RFR(S) [13] : 8226910 : make it possible to use jtreg's -match via run-test framework

Hi David, > On Jul 6, 2019, at 1:58 AM, David Holmes wrote: > > Hi Igor, > > On 6/07/2019 1:09 pm, Igor Ignatyev wrote: >> ping? >> -- Igor >>> On Jun 27, 2019, at 3:25 PM, Igor Ignatyev wrote: >>> >>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignaty

RFR(S) : 8238943: switch to jtreg 5.0

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev//8238943/webrev.00 > 10 lines changed: 1 ins; 0 del; 9 mod; Hi all, could you please review the patch which changes jtreg version used in jdk/jdk to the latest and greatest -- jtreg 5.0? and as (recently became) usually, this patch also bumps

RFR(S) : 8240904 : Screen flashes on test failures when running tests from make

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev//8240904/webrev.00 > 35 lines changed: 26 ins; 0 del; 10 mod Hi all, 8233827[1] which added screenshots to so-called failure handler had an unexpected side-effect on linux, where users might observer flashes each time a screenshot is taken, which, to put

Re: RFR(S) : 8240904 : Screen flashes on test failures when running tests from make

Thanks for your review, Sergey. -- Igor > On Apr 16, 2020, at 1:43 AM, Sergey Bylokhov > wrote: > > Looks fine. > > On 4/15/20 10:22 pm, Igor Ignatyev wrote: >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev//8240904/webrev.00 >>> 35 lines changed: 26 ins; 0 del; 10 m

Re: RFR(S) : 8240904 : Screen flashes on test failures when running tests from make

t 6:17 AM, Erik Joelsson wrote: > > Looks ok to me. Would it be possible to break up the long lines a bit to > improve readability? Backslash escape for newlines should work in properties > files. > > /Erik > > On 2020-04-15 22:22, Igor Ignatyev wrote: >> http://

Re: RFR 15 8242462: Residual Cleanup of rmic removal

Hi Roger, removal of applications/ctw/modules/jdk_rmic.java and changes in doc (assuming .html was generated from .md) look good to me. adding hotspot-runtime alias to bring attention of runtime team. I'm not sure who are the right people to review bin/unshuffle_list.txt though,.. build team

Re: RFR: JDK-8242463: ProcessTools.createNativeTestProcessBuilder() in testlib needs jdk/bin on PATH on Windows

Hi Erik, looks good to me. -- Igor > On Apr 9, 2020, at 8:15 AM, Erik Joelsson wrote: > > The test > open/test/hotspot/jtreg/testlibrary_tests/process/TestNativeProcessBuilder.java > fails when building the JDK with VS2019. More specifically, it fails if the > JDK under test is built with

Re: mistriggered "error: warnings found and -Werror specified" for java warnings

> On Apr 23, 2020, at 6:12 AM, Erik Joelsson wrote: > > Hello Matthias, > > On 2020-04-23 05:51, Matthias Klose wrote: >> jdk-15+20 fails to build with >> >> * For target >> support_test_failure_handler_classes__the.BUILD_FAILURE_HANDLER_batch: >>

Re: mistriggered "error: warnings found and -Werror specified" for java warnings

3/20 4:05 PM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: >> >>> 23 apr. 2020 kl. 15:50 skrev Igor Ignatyev : >>> >>> >>> >>>> On Apr 23, 2020, at 6:12 AM, Erik Joelsson >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hell

RFR: 8253207: enable problemlists jcheck's check

problemlists[[1]] check verifies that there are no problem-list entries w/ the bug-id used in the commit message. [1]: https://github.com/openjdk/skara/pull/518 - Commit messages: - 8253207: enable problemlists jcheck's check Changes:

Re: RFR: JDK-8247589: Implementation of Alpine Linux/x64 Port [v2]

On Thu, 8 Oct 2020 11:00:41 GMT, Aleksei Voitylov wrote: > @iignatev I resolved the conflict in whitebox.cpp and fixed a minor style nit > on the way. Could you take a look? LGTM - PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/49

Re: RFR: 8254102: use ProcessHandle::pid instead of ManagementFactory::getRuntimeMXBean to get pid in tests [v2]

> Hi all, > > could you please review this small cleanup which replaces > `ManagementFactory.getRuntimeMXBean().getName().split("@")[0]` w/ > `ProcessHandle.current().pid()` to get current > process pid? Thanks, > -- Igor Igor Ignatyev has updated the pull

Integrated: 8254102: use ProcessHandle::pid instead of ManagementFactory::getRuntimeMXBean to get pid in tests

On Tue, 6 Oct 2020 23:08:40 GMT, Igor Ignatyev wrote: > Hi all, > > could you please review this small cleanup which replaces > `ManagementFactory.getRuntimeMXBean().getName().split("@")[0]` w/ > `ProcessHandle.current().pid()` to get current > process pid?

Re: RFR: 8254102: use ProcessHandle::pid instead of ManagementFactory::getRuntimeMXBean to get pid in tests [v2]

On Wed, 7 Oct 2020 06:30:43 GMT, Aleksey Shipilev wrote: >> test/failure_handler/test/sanity/Suicide.java line 36: >> >>> 34: String osName = System.getProperty("os.name"); >>> 35: if (osName.contains("Windows")) { >>> 36: cmd = "taskkill.exe /F /PID " +

Re: RFR: 8254102: use ProcessHandle::pid instead of ManagementFactory::getRuntimeMXBean to get pid in tests [v2]

On Wed, 7 Oct 2020 18:38:07 GMT, Roger Riggs wrote: >> Igor Ignatyev has updated the pull request incrementally with two additional >> commits since the last revision: >> >> - use Long.toString instead of String.valueOf >> - remove explicit coversion to Str

RFR: 8254102: use ProcessHandle::pid instead of ManagementFactory::getRuntimeMXBean to get pid in tests

Hi all, could you please review this small cleanup which replaces `ManagementFactory.getRuntimeMXBean().getName().split("@")[0]` w/ `ProcessHandle.current().pid()` to get current process pid? Thanks, -- Igor - Commit messages: - update copyright - use ProcessHandle::pid instead

Re: RFR(S) : 8245610 : remove in-tree copy on gtest

iases know which changes might be required to enable/disable hotspot gtest tests compilation. Thanks. -- Igor > > /Magnus > > On 2020-05-22 20:12, Igor Ignatyev wrote: >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev/8245610/webrev.00/ >>> 132 lines changed: 80 ins; 36 del; 16 m

Re: RFR(S) : 8245610 : remove in-tree copy on gtest

paths to > libraries to build OpenJDK. This is now different, I always have to manually > download gtests and specify gtest location. This is regrettable. > > Thanks, Thomas > > > On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 2:27 PM Magnus Ihse Bursie > mailto:magnus.ihse.bur...@oracle.com>>

Re: RFR(T) : 8245870 : GTEST_FRAMEWORK_SRC should go thought UTIL_FIXUP_PATH

thanks Erik, pushed. -- Igor > On May 26, 2020, at 2:52 PM, Erik Joelsson wrote: > > Looks good. > > /Erik > > On 2020-05-26 14:48, Igor Ignatyev wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> could you please review this trivial one-liner? >> >> JBS: https:/

RFR(T) : 8245870 : GTEST_FRAMEWORK_SRC should go thought UTIL_FIXUP_PATH

Hi all, could you please review this trivial one-liner? JBS: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8245870 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev//8245870/webrev.00 testing: build on linux-x64,windows-x64 (in progress) Thanks, -- Igor

RFR(S) : 8245610 : remove in-tree copy on gtest

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev/8245610/webrev.00/ > 132 lines changed: 80 ins; 36 del; 16 mod http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev/8245610/webrev.00%2bremoval/ > 57482 lines changed: 80 ins; 57385 del; 17 mod; Hi all, could you please review this small (if you ignore removal part) patch

Re: RFR(S) : 8245610 : remove in-tree copy on gtest

google/googletest <https://github.com/google/googletest> git checkout release-1.8.1 -- Igor > On May 22, 2020, at 11:12 AM, Igor Ignatyev wrote: > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev/8245610/webrev.00/ >> 132 lines changed: 80 ins; 36 del; 16 mod > http://cr.openjdk.java.ne

Re: RFR(S) : 8245610 : remove in-tree copy on gtest

Magnus a chance to > look at this too. > > /Erik > > On 2020-05-22 11:12, Igor Ignatyev wrote: >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev/8245610/webrev.00/ >>> 132 lines changed: 80 ins; 36 del; 16 mod >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev/8245610/webrev.00%2b

Integrated: 8253207: enable problemlists jcheck's check

On Wed, 16 Sep 2020 00:15:54 GMT, Igor Ignatyev wrote: > problemlists[[1]] check verifies that there are no problem-list entries w/ > the bug-id used in the commit message. > > [1]: https://github.com/openjdk/skara/pull/518 This pull request has now been integrated. Changes

Re: RFR: 8253207: enable problemlists jcheck's check

On Wed, 16 Sep 2020 13:08:17 GMT, Erik Joelsson wrote: >> problemlists[[1]] check verifies that there are no problem-list entries w/ >> the bug-id used in the commit message. >> >> [1]: https://github.com/openjdk/skara/pull/518 > > Marked as reviewed by erikj (Reviewer). thanks for your

Re: RFR: JDK-8247573 gtest/GTestWrapper.java is not helpful if gtest framework is missing

LGTM — Igor > On Jun 23, 2020, at 11:13 AM, Erik Joelsson wrote: > > That looks much better! :) > > /Erik > >> On 2020-06-23 09:53, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: >>> On 2020-06-23 17:05, Erik Joelsson wrote: >>> Looks good, but that was the worst way of posting a patch I've seen to date. >> The

Re: RFR(S) : 8211977 : move testlibrary tests into one place

@David, Erik, Magnus, please find the answers to your comments at the bottom of this email. @all, David's and Erik's comments made me realize that some parts of the original patch were stashed away and didn't make it to webrev.00. I'm truly sorry for the confusion and inconvenience. I also

Re: RFR(S) : 8211977 : move testlibrary tests into one place

Magnus, Erik, thanks for your reviews, pushed w/ a newline being added at L#654 of make/Main.gmk. Cheers, -- Igor > On Jun 16, 2020, at 7:03 AM, Magnus Ihse Bursie > wrote: > > On 2020-06-16 15:06, Erik Joelsson wrote: >> >> On 2020-06-15 17:39, Igor Ignatyev

  1   2   >