RFR: 8039438: Some tests depend on internal API sun.misc.IOUtils

Hi. I'd like to ask for review of this fix: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~shurailine/8039438/webrev.00/ Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8039438 Thank you. Shura

Re: RFR: 8039438: Some tests depend on internal API sun.misc.IOUtils

On 4/9/14, 10:42 PM, Alan Bateman wrote: On 09/04/2014 17:00, Alexandre (Shura) Iline wrote: Hi. I'd like to ask for review of this fix: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~shurailine/8039438/webrev.00/ Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8039438 Looks okay to me. For the class

RFR: 8039816: Some tests depend on internal API sun.security.action.GetPropertyAction

Hi. I'd like to ask for review of this fix: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~shurailine/8039816/webrev.00/ Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8039816 Thank you. Shura

Re: RFR: 8039816: Some tests depend on internal API sun.security.action.GetPropertyAction

On 4/14/14, 2:00 PM, Chris Hegarty wrote: Looks good to me Shura. I can sponsor this for you ( if needed ). Thank you. Shura. -Chris. On 14/04/14 10:48, Alexandre (Shura) Iline wrote: Hi. I'd like to ask for review of this fix: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~shurailine/8039816/webrev.00

Re: Review: demo extension methods (it is illustrates the feature default method usage)

Taras, It is yet an open question as to whether we are to publish demos with the NetBeans project and tests or just the code. Until that is decided I suggest you only provide for the review the code which is the actual demo code. Thank you. Shura On 9/27/13 5:01 AM, taras ledkov wrote:

Re: RFR JDK-8147539: (zipfs) ZipPath should throw ProviderMismatchException when invoking register()

Hi. Should the tests also declare “@modules jdk.zipfs”? Shura > On May 25, 2016, at 9:39 AM, Xueming Shen wrote: > > Hi, > > Please help review the changes for the following zipfs related bug fixes > > JDK-8147539: (zipfs) ZipPath should throw

Re: RFR JDK-8147539: (zipfs) ZipPath should throw ProviderMismatchException when invoking register()

> On May 25, 2016, at 11:31 AM, Xueming Shen <xueming.s...@oracle.com> wrote: > > On 5/25/16, 11:06 AM, Alexandre (Shura) Iline wrote: >> Sherman, >> >> Not declaring any module dependencies in test is equivalent to declaring >> that the test only depen

Re: RFR JDK-8147539: (zipfs) ZipPath should throw ProviderMismatchException when invoking register()

terface. > It depends on the jdk runtime to pick up the zipfs "provider" to function. So > if the jdk runtime fails to pick up the zipfs module for whatever reason, > that's something we want to detect as well? > > -Sherman > > On 05/25/2016 10:18 AM, Alexandre (Shu

RFR 8157996: Unneeded import in lib/testlibrary/jdk/testlibrary/SimpleSSLContext.java

Hi. Please take a look on an obvious fix: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~shurailine/8157996/webrev.00/ There was an unneeded import statement which was getting in the way when running tests with limited module availability. Also in a couple of places I have added try with resources. Shura

Re: RFR 8157996: Unneeded import in lib/testlibrary/jdk/testlibrary/SimpleSSLContext.java

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~shurailine/8157996/webrev.01/ Thank you. Shura > On May 26, 2016, at 3:29 PM, Alexandre (Shura) Iline > <alexandre.il...@oracle.com> wrote: > > >> On May 26, 2016, at 3:16 PM, Mandy Chung <mandy.ch...@oracle.com> wrote: >>

Re: RFR: JDK-8151914 java/util/jar/JarFile/MultiReleaseJar* tests do not declare module dependences

Chris, could you please take another look: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~shurailine/8151914/webrev.02/ What I have discovered is that jdk.zipfs was used to access jars on the classpath, which were JTreg jars: jtreg.jar, testing.jar, etc. Cleaning the class path through the environment removed

Re: RFR: JDK-8151914 java/util/jar/JarFile/MultiReleaseJar* tests do not declare module dependences

> On May 5, 2016, at 11:42 AM, Alexandre (Shura) Iline > <alexandre.il...@oracle.com> wrote: > Whether the java.tools API behavior is correct is a separate matter. I am > planning to create a standalone test case and take it with javac ppl. I take this ^^ back, as the e

RFR: JDK-8151914 java/util/jar/JarFile/MultiReleaseJar* tests do not declare module dependences

Hi, Can you please take a look on: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~shurailine/8151914/webrev.01/ ? Thank you Shura

Re: RFR: JDK-8151914 java/util/jar/JarFile/MultiReleaseJar* tests do not declare module dependences

This makes sense - I will move the tests into a subduer, put the dependencies into a TEST.properties file. jdk.zipfs has the code needed for access jars - the tests are failing without that dependency. Shura > On May 4, 2016, at 8:30 AM, Chris Hegarty wrote: > > On

Re: JDK 9 RFR of 8161402: Provide a javadoc description for java.prefs module

> On Jul 19, 2016, at 8:19 AM, Alan Bateman wrote: > > On 19/07/2016 16:06, Brian Burkhalter wrote: > >> It seems to me it would be less work overall if there were only one single >> issue to subsume adding the verbiage for all modules. There is only one >> single

Re: JDK 9 RFR of 8161402: Provide a javadoc description for java.prefs module

f this and grab > the existing bugs Wed. > > Best > Lance >> On Jul 19, 2016, at 11:31 AM, Brian Burkhalter <brian.burkhal...@oracle.com >> <mailto:brian.burkhal...@oracle.com>> wrote: >> >> On Jul 19, 2016, at 8:20 AM, Alexandre (Shura) Iline &g

RFR: 8148859 Fix module dependences for java/time tests

Hi. Please review a quick fix for the java/time test module dependencies. http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~shurailine/8148859/webrev.00/ It is using new syntax added in JTReg, which allows to only build certain classes from a test library for TestNG tests:

Re: RFR(S): 8165583: Fix module dependencies for jdk/java/util/* tests

This looks good, Sergei. Shura > On Sep 7, 2016, at 2:25 AM, Sergei Kovalev wrote: > > Hello team, > > Please review the changes for fixing JDK issue: > > Bug ID: JDK-8165583 > WebRev link: >

RFR: 8164982 Fix legal notices in java/lang, java/net, java/util tests.

15/2016 11:39 AM, Alexandre (Shura) Iline wrote: >> Hi, >> >> Please review this bulk update of JDK test sources which is fixing legal >> notices formatting and content. >> >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~shurailine/8164052/webrev_00/ >> >> I am se

Re: [9] RFR: 8167240: Write new tests to cover functionality of existing 'jimage' options

Hi, Denis, By an agreement, @modules should go before any action tag. You use it after @build. Shura > On Oct 6, 2016, at 9:37 AM, Denis Kononenko > wrote: > > Hi, > > Could someone please review these new tests for jimage utility. > > There're 5 new files

RFR: 8164859 Fix module dependences in java/text tests

Hi. Please review this simple fix: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~shurailine/8164859/webrev.00/ This fix is only adding @modules with either java.desktop or jdk.localedata to number of tests - no other changes. Shura

Re: RFR: 8148859 Fix module dependences for java/time tests

> On Aug 23, 2016, at 7:35 AM, Alan Bateman <alan.bate...@oracle.com> wrote: > > On 23/08/2016 01:32, Alexandre (Shura) Iline wrote: > >> Hi. >> >> Please review a quick fix for the java/time test module dependencies. >> http://cr.open

Re: Review Request: JDK-8167057 jdeps to list the modules and internal APIs to help find @modules for tests

Mandy, I have a question around line 228 of src/jdk.jdeps/share/classes/com/sun/tools/jdeps/JdepsTask.java: 224 new Option(false, "--list-deps", "--list-reduced-deps") { 225 void process(JdepsTask task, String opt, String arg) { 226

Re: RFR: 8159523. Fix tests depending on absence of -limitmods in VM arguments.

Alan, For me, having module and package parameters separate makes it a lot easier: public JavaTask addExports(String module, String package, String… targetModules) Consider this: .addExports(JAVA_BASE, JDK_MISC, ALL_UNNAMED) where, needless to say, JAVA_BASE and JDK_MISC are constants defined

Re: [9] RFR: 8167240: Write new tests to cover functionality of existing 'jimage' options

Denis, I can see that you have switched to the top level test library with this change. With that you are getting more module dependencies than just java.base. First of all, it would probably make sense to build only the classes you needed (which would be jdk.test.lib.process.ProcessTools, I

Re: RFR(L) : 8176176 : fix @modules in jdk_svc tests

separate bugs is more convenient. > [1] is new webrev w/ changes only in the files w/ incorrect module dependency > declarations. > > [1] http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev//8176176/webrev.01/index.html > > Thanks, > — Igor > >> On Mar 9, 2017, at 5:02 PM, Alexandre (

Re: RFR: 8159523. Fix tests depending on absence of -limitmods in VM arguments.

ve smth similar to the next signatures for analyze methods: > ProcessResult analyze(String, Analyzer::, Consumer<Analyze>); > ProcessResult stdout(Consumer< TextAnalyzer >); > ProcessResult stderr(Consumer< TextAnalyzer >); > > So in tests we will have: > Task &

RFR: 8178910 Problemlist sample tests

Hi. Could you please review a quick fix to temporarily disable a couple of tests: $ hg diff ProblemList.txt diff --git a/test/ProblemList.txt b/test/ProblemList.txt --- a/test/ProblemList.txt +++ b/test/ProblemList.txt @@ -308,4 +308,7 @@ org/omg/CORBA/OrbPropertiesTest.java

Re: RFR: 8159523. Fix tests depending on absence of -limitmods in VM arguments.

Thank you, Mandy! Comments inline. > On Mar 6, 2017, at 6:00 PM, Mandy Chung <mandy.ch...@oracle.com> wrote: > > >> On Mar 6, 2017, at 5:27 PM, Alexandre (Shura) Iline >> <alexandre.il...@oracle.com> wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >>

RFR: 8159523. Fix tests depending on absence of -limitmods in VM arguments.

Hi, Could you please review the suggested fox for: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8159523 There has been a bit of discussion on jigsaw-dev, but it perhaps make sense to include core-libs-dev. There have been some fixes since the review was published, so we are now at revision #4:

Re: JDK 10 RFR of JDK-8183173: Add private constructors to Fdlibm-internal classes

Thank you, Joe! Looks good. Shura > On Jun 28, 2017, at 4:06 PM, joe darcy wrote: > > Hello, > > Please review the patch below to address > >JDK-8183173: Add private constructors to Fdlibm-internal classes > > There are four fdblim methods ported to Java (so far)

Re: RFR 8179852: Remove references to demo tests from TEST.groups

e-libs-dev/2017-May/047442.html> >> which I just noticed was approved at 2:59 PM PT? >> >> Brian >> >> On May 5, 2017, at 3:00 PM, Alexandre (Shura) Iline >> <alexandre.il...@oracle.com <mailto:alexandre.il...@oracle.com>> wrote: &g

Re: RFR 8179852: Remove references to demo tests from TEST.groups

t; Is there any conflict with this > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2017-May/047442.html > <http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2017-May/047442.html> > which I just noticed was approved at 2:59 PM PT? > > Brian > > On May 5, 2017, a

RFR 8179852: Remove references to demo tests from TEST.groups

Hi. Can you please take a quick look on this fix. Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8179852 Change: $ hg diff diff --git a/test/TEST.groups b/test/TEST.groups --- a/test/TEST.groups +++ b/test/TEST.groups @@ -465,7 +465,6 @@ needs_jdk = \ :jdk_jdi \ com/sun/tools \ - demo \

Re: RFR 8179852: Remove references to demo tests from TEST.groups

Thank you! Pushed. Shura > On May 5, 2017, at 2:56 PM, Brian Burkhalter <brian.burkhal...@oracle.com> > wrote: > > Looks OK to me and I did verify the statement about ProblemList.txt. > > Brian > > On May 5, 2017, at 2:51 PM, Alexandre (Shura) Iline

Re: Which test groups to run instead of :jdk (8176838)

I put this advice into a comment in the bug? I would appreciate it! Thanks you. Shura > > Best regards, > Goetz. > >> -----Original Message- >> From: Alexandre (Shura) Iline [mailto:alexandre.il...@oracle.com] >> Sent: Montag, 27. November 2017 22:56 >> To

Re: Which test groups to run instead of :jdk (8176838)

Hi, Goetz. :jdk, when created, was supposed to include tests which could be run by full JDK, which is, well, all the tests. Over the time there could have been new tests added which were not included in the :jdk group. In fact, I have just now rolled the repository back to before the 8176838

RFR 8176838: Remove :compact1, :compact2. :compact3, :needs_jre test groups.

Hi. Please take a look on suggested change of removing obsolete test groups. Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8176838 Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~shurailine/8176838/webrev.01 Thank you Shura

RFR 8191736: replace javah w/ javac in jdk tests

Hi. Please take look on this quick fix of removing remains of javah usages from test/jdk. Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8191736 Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~shurailine/8191736/webrev.00/ Thank you. Shura

RFR 8178342: Missing @modules in jdk/jdk/nio/zipfs

Hi. Can you took a quick look on this fix. While adding missing @modules declaration in jdk/nio/zipfs/ZeroDate.java, I noticed that @modules declaration is not in the right location in other tests. Per the agreement it should come before any @run. Bug:

Re: RFR 8208364: java/lang/reflect/callerCache/ReflectionCallerCacheTest.java missing module dependencies declaration

Jon > > On 08/06/2018 03:10 PM, mandy chung wrote: >> +1 >> >> Mandy >> >> On 8/6/18 1:51 PM, Alexandre (Shura) Iline wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> Please taka a quick look on this fix: >>> >>> $ hg diff >>>

RFR 8208364: java/lang/reflect/callerCache/ReflectionCallerCacheTest.java missing module dependencies declaration

Hi, Please taka a quick look on this fix: $ hg diff --- a/test/jdk/java/lang/reflect/callerCache/ReflectionCallerCacheTest.java +++ b/test/jdk/java/lang/reflect/callerCache/ReflectionCallerCacheTest.java @@ -25,8 +25,9 @@ * @test * @bug 8202113 * @summary Test the caller class loader is

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

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 --- a/test/jtreg-ext/requires/VMProps.java +++ b/test/jtreg-ext/requires/VMProps.java @@ -432,7 +432,8 @@

RFR 8199616: Fix @module declarations in tier1 tests

Hi, Please take a quick look on fix adding missing module dependencies to tests in :tier1 jdk tests. Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~shurailine/8199616/webrev.00 Shura.

Re: RFR 8199616: Fix @module declarations in tier1 tests

> On Mar 15, 2018, at 4:15 PM, mandy chung <mandy.ch...@oracle.com> wrote: > > > > On 3/15/18 3:40 PM, Alexandre (Shura) Iline wrote: >> Hi, >> >> Please take a quick look on fix adding missing module dependencies to tests >>

Re: RFR 8199616: Fix @module declarations in tier1 tests

ing belongs in jtreg itself. That is indeed one of the options we are discussing. Shura > > > On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 5:12 PM Alexandre (Shura) Iline > <alexandre.il...@oracle.com <mailto:alexandre.il...@oracle.com>> wrote: > Martin, > > >> On Mar 15, 2018,

Re: RFR 8199616: Fix @module declarations in tier1 tests

t; Why was it only noticed now? It was not - I have just gotten around fixing it. There are more known @module deficiencies right now. > Can we automatically prevent backsliding? That would be a job for a continuous integration system, I imagine. Shura > > > On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 3