Re: RFR: JDK-8047973 Quarantine compiler/ciReplay/*

Staffan, 1. '@ignore' should be followed by CR numbers 2. I doubt that TestVM* failures are related to JDK-8032226. these tests don't use SA agent, they rather fail due to JDK-8031978 Igor On 06/24/2014 03:12 PM, Staffan Larsen wrote: These tests keep being unstable in nightly testing (see

Re: [9] RFR (XS): JDK-8066862: TestMutuallyExclusivePlatformPredicates fails on all platforms

Hi Filipp, looks good to me. thanks for fixing this. Igor On 12/10/2014 04:48 PM, Filipp Zhinkin wrote: Hi all, please review a fix for 8066862. Issue: testlibrary_tests/TestMutuallyExclusivePlatformPredicates.java fails with RuntimeException: All Platform's methods with signature '():Z'

Re: RFR: 8067295 - Need to port Utils chagnes... 8067307: Need custom classloaders... 8067291: Need additional vm checks...

Dmitrij, all fixes look good to me. // could you please send separate RFR for each CR next time? Thanks, Igor On 12/15/2014 05:06 PM, Dmitrij Pochepko wrote: Hi, a bit of update for https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8067295 (port of JDK-8066440)

Re: RFR: 8059625 - JEP-JDK-8043304: Test task: DTrace- tests for segmented codecache feature

I'd prefer to check privileges by running dtrace against dtrace; and do it in DtraceRunner::dtraceAvailable, smth like result = false; dtrace = getDtracePath(); if ($dtrace) { $dtrace $dtrace result = $? == 0; } return $result; Igor On 12/24/2014 11:09 PM, Dmitrij Pochepko wrote: Hi,

Re: RFR: 8059625 - JEP-JDK-8043304: Test task: DTrace- tests for segmented codecache feature

of privileges? Igor's suggestion will prevent us from running DTrace without required privileges, so I'd prefer to see the test failure instead of a warning in case of non-zero exit code returned by DTrace. Also, please add @bug to the test. Thanks, Filipp. On 12/25/2014 02:05 PM, Igor Ignatyev wrote: I'd

Re: RFR: 8059625 - JEP-JDK-8043304: Test task: DTrace- tests for segmented codecache feature

exit code returned by DTrace. Also, please add @bug to the test. Thanks, Filipp. On 12/25/2014 02:05 PM, Igor Ignatyev wrote: I'd prefer to check privileges by running dtrace against dtrace; and do it in DtraceRunner::dtraceAvailable, smth like result = false; dtrace = getDtracePath

Re: RFR (S) : 8073607 : add trace events for inlining

* for the Method there somewhere): result.set_caller(Method* caller_method); result.set_callee(Method* callee_method); Thanks Markus -Original Message- From: Igor Ignatyev Sent: den 24 februari 2015 22:11 To: hotspot-compiler-...@openjdk.java.net compiler; serviceability-dev@openjdk.java.net Subject

Re: RFR (S) : 8073607 : add trace events for inlining

*, then your struct approach is understandable. /Markus -Original Message- From: Igor Ignatyev Sent: den 27 februari 2015 11:30 To: Markus Gronlund Cc: hotspot-compiler-...@openjdk.java.net compiler; serviceability-dev@openjdk.java.net Subject: Re: RFR (S) : 8073607 : add trace events

Re: RFR (S) : 8073607 : add trace events for inlining

the Metadata* for the Method there somewhere): result.set_caller(Method* caller_method); result.set_callee(Method* callee_method); Thanks Markus -Original Message- From: Igor Ignatyev Sent: den 24 februari 2015 22:11 To: hotspot-compiler-...@openjdk.java.net compiler; serviceability-dev

Re: [urgent] RFR: 8081470 com/sun/jdi tests are failing with Error. failed to clean up files after test with jtreg 4.1 b12

Looks good to me. Igor On 05/29/2015 11:53 AM, Staffan Larsen wrote: Can I have a fast review of the following change that is currently blocking hotspot pushes in jprt. jtreg 4.1b12 adds stricter checking of @library tags. Some com/sun/jdi tests have @library clauses that are not needed. I

RFR(XXS) : 8149700 : Remove jdk_svc test group from tier * groups

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev/8149700/webrev.00/ > > 2 lines changed: 0 ins; 1 del; 1 mod; Hi all, could you please review the tiny patch which removes jdk_svc test group from tier2 test group? Many of svc tests fail intermittently due to different reasons, that prevents us from

Re: RFR(S) : 8177374 : fix module dependency declaration in jdk_svc tests

Mandy/Daniel, yes, jdk.management.agent does require java.management, but not transitively. Shura and I have discussed that and agreed that in such cases a test should declare dependency explicitly, otherwise it can start to fail when some of transitive requires (which are not a part of the

Re: RFR(S) : 8177374 : fix module dependency declaration in jdk_svc tests

n <alan.bate...@oracle.com> wrote: > > On 22/03/2017 20:09, Igor Ignatyev wrote: > >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev/8177374/webrev.00/index.html >>> 40 lines changed: 26 ins; 13 del; 1 mod; >> Hi all, >> >> could you please review this change

RFR(M) : 8177507 : line number sensitive tests for jdi should be unified

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev/8177507/webrev.00 > 295 lines changed: 176 ins; 15 del; 104 mod; Hi all, could you please review this fix for 8177507? due to their nature, some of jdi tests are line number sensitive. unfortunately different tests indicate that differently, so it's quite

Re: RFR(S) : 8177374 : fix module dependency declaration in jdk_svc tests

> On Mar 24, 2017, at 12:10 AM, Alan Bateman <alan.bate...@oracle.com> wrote: > On 23/03/2017 22:06, Igor Ignatyev wrote: >> >>> I can see what the information tags might be grouped but @library and >>> @modules should also be grouped with the @compile/@r

RFR(S) : 8177374 : fix module dependency declaration in jdk_svc tests

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev/8177374/webrev.00/index.html > 40 lines changed: 26 ins; 13 del; 1 mod; Hi all, could you please review this changeset which fixes in a few jdk_svc tests which were missed by JDK-8176176[1]? testing: :jdk_svc tests webrev:

Re: RFR(S) : 8177374 : fix module dependency declaration in jdk_svc tests

This test should need java.management. Where is it declared? it's declared in test/java/lang/management/TEST.properties which has been pushed by JDK-8176176. Thanks, -- Igor > On Mar 22, 2017, at 2:01 PM, Mandy Chung <mandy.ch...@oracle.com> wrote: > > >> On Mar 22

Re: RFR(M) : 8177507 : line number sensitive tests for jdi should be unified

e, I'll update it before push. -- Igor > > Thanks, > David > - > > On 29/03/2017 10:42 AM, Igor Ignatyev wrote: >> Hi, >> >> still looking for a reviewer, anyone? >> >> -- Igor >>> On Mar 24, 2017, at 1:56 PM, Igor Ignatyev <i

Re: RFR(M) : 8177507 : line number sensitive tests for jdi should be unified

Hi, still looking for a reviewer, anyone? -- Igor > On Mar 24, 2017, at 1:56 PM, Igor Ignatyev <igor.ignat...@oracle.com> wrote: > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev/8177507/webrev.00 >> 295 lines changed: 176 ins; 15 del; 104 mod; > > Hi all, > >

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

sEvent.java.udiff.html > > * @modules java.corba > * jdk.jdi > > Should the jdk.jdi be removed from this com/sun/jdi test? > > > Thanks, > Serguei > > > On 3/15/17 11:16, Igor Ignatyev wrote: >> Shura, >> >> Thank you for your rev

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

va/lang/management/PlatformLoggingMXBean/TEST.properties you are > explicitly calling out java.management. You do not have to do that because > “modules” property is concatenated through the hierarchy. java.management is > already listed in test/java/lang/management/TEST.properties. &g

Re: RFR(M) : 8177507 : line number sensitive tests for jdi should be unified

Misha, David, Serguei, Thank you for review! -- Igor

Re: RFR(M) : 8177507 : line number sensitive tests for jdi should be unified

lt;david.hol...@oracle.com > <mailto:david.hol...@oracle.com>> wrote: > > Hi Igor, > > On 3/04/2017 3:09 AM, Igor Ignatyev wrote: >> Hi, >> >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev//8177507/webrev.01 >> <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev//81775

Re: RFR(M) : 8177507 : line number sensitive tests for jdi should be unified

.com> wrote: > > Two nits: > - test/com/sun/jdi/FetchLocals.java > - test/com/sun/jdi/LambdaBreakpointTest.java > > Second copyright year should be 2017. > On Mar 24, 2017, at 1:56 PM, Igor Ignatyev <igor.ignat...@oracle.com> wrote: > Hi all, > > could you p

Re: RFR(S) 8178731: compiler/ciReplay/SABase.java does not compile

enjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8178731 > webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev/epavlova/8178731/webrev.00/ > > Tested by running jprt. > > thanks, > -katya > > p.s. > Igor Ignatyev volunteered to sponsor this change.

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

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev/8176176/webrev.00/index.html > 2586 lines changed: 669 ins; 484 del; 1433 mod; Hi all, Could you please review this changeset which fix @modules dependency declaration in jdk_svc tests? there are a couple issues w/ modules in jdk_svc tests: - some tests

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

enjdk.java.net/~iignatyev/8176176/webrev.00/test/com/sun/jdi/ArgumentValuesTest.java.sdiff.html > [2] > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev/8176176/webrev.00/test/com/sun/jdi/ArrayLengthDumpTest.sh.sdiff.html > >> On Mar 7, 2017, at 1:07 PM, Igor Ignatyev <igor.ignat...@oracle.com>

Re: RFR(M) : 8177507 : line number sensitive tests for jdi should be unified

.03 <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev/8177507/webrev.03> Thanks, -- Igor > On Apr 3, 2017, at 1:53 PM, David Holmes <david.hol...@oracle.com> wrote: > > On 4/04/2017 2:46 AM, Igor Ignatyev wrote: >> looks like I have uploaded the webrev before I saved files...

Re: RFR 8179457: Remove demo/jvmti tests

Hi Shura, the fix looks good to me, thank you for taking care of it. -- Igor > On Apr 28, 2017, at 2:41 PM, Alexandre (Shura) Iline > wrote: > > Hi, > > Could you please take a quick look on a source code change to remove > demo/jvmti tests: >

Re: RFR(M): 8178054: [TESTBUG] Need test for JVM TI IsModifiableModule

> Thank you a lot for review! > There are no non-modifiable modules in jdk 9. > So that it is impossible to test that IsModifiableModule returns false. > Thank you for the suggestion, I'll replace the Exception with > java/lang/AssertionError. > > Thanks, > Serguei >

Re: RFR: JDK-8178508 Co-locate remaining MM tests

looks good to me as well. -- Igor > On Jun 14, 2017, at 10:06 AM, Ujwal Vangapally > wrote: > > Hi Igor can you kindly review this. > > Thanks, > > Ujwal > > On 6/14/2017 9:40 AM, Mandy Chung wrote: >> >>> On Jun 13, 2017, at 8:13 PM, Ujwal Vangapally

Re: URGENT RFR(XXS): 8193225 - [BACKOUT] fix for 8182307 Error during JRMP connection

Reviewed. -- Igor > On Dec 7, 2017, at 4:46 PM, Daniel D. Daugherty > wrote: > > Resending with the correct subject line! > > > Greetings, > > My fix for the following bug: > > JDK-8182307: Error during JRMP connection establishment >

RFR(M) : 8202392: [TESTBUG] open source vm testbase heapdump tests

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev//8202392/webrev.00/index.html > 1396 lines changed: 1396 ins; 0 del; 0 mod; Hi all, could you please review his patch which open sources heapdump tests from so-called VM testbase? as it's obvious from test names, they test heap dumping using jmap and a

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,

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: 8203491: [TESTBUG] Port heapdump tests into java

Hi Leonid, I haven't reviewed your change fully, although I noticed that you merged several tests into one -- TestHeapDumpOnOutOfMemoryError, I don't think it's a good idea as we lose atomicity of test results/executions. could you please split TestHeapDumpOnOutOfMemoryError into independent

RFR(L) : 8199379 : [TESTBUG] Open source vm testbase JDB tests

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev//8199379/webrev.00/index.html > 18000 lines changed: 17999 ins; 0 del; 1 mod; Hi all, could you please review this patch which open sources JDB tests from VM testbase? these tests were developed to test 'jdb' tool and JDI thru it. As usually w/ VM

RFR(L) : 8199371 : [TESTBUG] Open source vm testbase JDWP tests

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev//8199371/webrev.00/index.html > 64675 lines changed: 64675 ins; 0 del; 0 mod; Hi all, could you please review this patch which open sources JDWP tests from VM testbase? As usually w/ VM testbase code, these tests are old, they have been run in hotspot

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: 8209585: [Graal] vmTestbase/nsk/jvmti/scenarios/sampling tests fail with "Too small stack of resumed thread"

ssue. >> >> thanks, >> >> Chris >> >> On 8/27/18 6:19 PM, Igor Ignatyev wrote: >>> (cc'ing compiler alias) >>> >>> I ain't sure that we should change these tests given that w/ libgraal (as >>> an opposite to the current w

RFR(XXS) : 8210108 : sun/tools/jstatd test build failures after JDK-8210022

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev//8210108/webrev.00/index.html > 3 lines changed: 1 ins; 1 del; 1 mod; Hi all, could you please review this small and trivial follow-up fix? unfortunately, test/jdk/sun/tools/jstatd/JstatdTest now uses two different OutputAnalyzer classes,

Re: RFR(XXS) : 8210108 : sun/tools/jstatd test build failures after JDK-8210022

om>> wrote: > > Looks good, thanks for fixing! > > Cheers, > Mikael > > > On Aug 28, 2018, at 11:57 AM, Igor Ignatyev > <mailto:igor.ignat...@oracle.com>> wrote: > > > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev//8210108/webrev.00/index.html >

RFR(XS) : 8186548 : move jdk.testlibrary.JcmdBase closer to tests

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev//8186548/webrev.00/index.html > 10 lines changed: 4 ins; 4 del; 2 mod; Hi all, could you please review this small patch which puts JcmdBase into the directory w/ the only two tests which use it? JBS: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8186548 webrev:

RFR(S) : 8210022 : remove jdk.testlibrary.ProcessThread, TestThread and XRun

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev//8210022/webrev.00/index.html > 303 lines changed: 21 ins; 266 del; 16 mod; Hi all, could you please review the testlibrary clean up which removes jdk.testlibrary.ProcessThread, TestThread and XRun classes and update all their users to use the same

Re: RFR(XS) : 8186548 : move jdk.testlibrary.JcmdBase closer to tests

Hi Alex and Chris, thanks for your reviews. -- Igor > On Aug 27, 2018, at 4:16 PM, Alex Menkov wrote: > > +1 > > --alex > > On 08/27/2018 15:41, Chris Plummer wrote: >> Looks good. >> Chris >> On 8/27/18 3:37 PM, Igor Ignatyev wrote: >>> http:

Re: 8209585: [Graal] vmTestbase/nsk/jvmti/scenarios/sampling tests fail with "Too small stack of resumed thread"

(cc'ing compiler alias) I ain't sure that we should change these tests given that w/ libgraal (as an opposite to the current way we use graal) we shouldn't see this issue at all. I'd rather left these tests in the graal-specific problem list till we switch to libraal. Vladimir, Katja, what do

RFR(L/M) : 8210112 : remove jdk.testlibrary.ProcessTools

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev//8210112/webrev.00/index.html > 2375 lines changed: 322 ins; 1662 del; 391 mod Hi all, could you please review the patch which removes jdk.testlibrary.ProcessTools and its friends and replaces all theirs usages w/ corresponding classes from

Re: RFR(L/M) : 8210112 : remove jdk.testlibrary.ProcessTools

; +} > + > +@Override > +public String getStdout() { > + return stdout.getBuffer(); > +} > > +@Override > +public String getStderr() { > + return stderr.getBuffer() > +} > > I think it is more clear, what do you think? > > Apa

Re: RFR(L/M) : 8210112 : remove jdk.testlibrary.ProcessTools

he incremental webrev, that made looking at the changes so much > easier! here is the next one -- http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev//8210112/webrev.1-2/index.html <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev//8210112/webrev.1-2/index.html> -- Igor > Jc > > On Wed, Sep 5, 2018

Re: RFR(L/M) : 8210112 : remove jdk.testlibrary.ProcessTools

ts, personal preferences, and just > I noticed them as you were cleaning them up! > > Awesome clean up :-) > Jc > > On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 3:20 PM Igor Ignatyev <mailto:igor.ignat...@oracle.com>> wrote: > Hi JC, > > >> On Sep 5, 2018, at 2:59 P

RFR(M) : 8182404 : remove jdk.testlibrary.JDKToolFinder and JDKToolLauncher

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev//8182404/webrev.00/index.html > 327 lines changed: 13 ins; 270 del; 44 mod; Hi all, could you please review the patch which removes jdk.testlibrary.JDKToolFinder and JDKToolLauncher and replaces their usages w/ jdk.test.lib.JDKToolFinder and

Re: RFR(S): 8198655: test/lib/jdk/test/lib/apps/LingeredApp shouldn't inherit cout/cerr

> On Mar 12, 2018, at 8:53 AM, Chris Plummer wrote: > > On 3/11/18 7:52 PM, David Holmes wrote: >> Hi Chris, >> >> On 10/03/2018 6:46 AM, Chris Plummer wrote: >>> Hello, >>> >>> Please help review the following: >>> >>>

Re: RFR(S): 8198655: test/lib/jdk/test/lib/apps/LingeredApp shouldn't inherit cout/cerr

Hi Chris, the changeset looks reasonable, reviewed. Thanks, -- Igor > On Mar 21, 2018, at 3:26 PM, David Holmes wrote: > > Sorry Chris I just don't have time to try and figure this one out. If it > works uses it. > > David > > On 22/03/2018 4:24 AM, Chris Plummer

Re: RFR (M) 8212148: Remove remaining NSK_CPP_STUBs

LGTM -- Igor > On Oct 19, 2018, at 7:40 PM, JC Beyler wrote: > > Hi all, > > I pushed the webrev into the submit repo and it failed to build due to > internal tests that have references to the NSK_CPP_STUB. Here is the new > webrev: > > Webrev:

Re: RFR (XS) 8213246: Fix typo in vmTestbase failuire to failure

LGTM -- Igor - a Reviewer > On Nov 2, 2018, at 4:22 PM, Mikael Vidstedt > wrote: > > > Looks good. > > Cheers, > Mikael - not a Reviewer > >> On Nov 2, 2018, at 4:05 PM, JC Beyler > > wrote: >> >> Hi all, >> >> Could I get a review for a trivial typo fix: >>

Re: RFR (M) 8211036 : Remove the NSK_STUB macros from vmTestbase for non jvmti

(cc-ing hotspot-dev alias) Hi Jc, the fix looks good to me. don't forget to clean up nsk/share/jni/README at the end. Thanks, -- Igor > On Sep 24, 2018, at 9:28 AM, JC Beyler wrote: > > Hi all, > > As the tests have become C++ tests, the NSK_CPP_STUBS are no longer needed. I > did two awk

Re: RFR (L) 8210481: Remove #ifdef cplusplus from vmTestbase

Hi JC, looks good to me. (cc'ing hotspot-dev alias as it affects other teams' tests) -- Igor > On Sep 14, 2018, at 9:50 AM, JC Beyler wrote: > > Hi all, > > Could I get a review for the following webrev: > Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jcbeyler/8210481/webrev.00/ >

Re: RFR (XS) 8210726: Fix up a few minor nits forgotten by JDK-8210665

Hi JC, LGTM. -- Igor > On Sep 14, 2018, at 9:49 AM, JC Beyler wrote: > > Hi all, > > When doing the work for JDK-8210665, I got confused with the webrevs and > forgot to add Serguei's nits for the patch. I apologize for that and here > they are in a separate bug. > > Could I get a review

Re: RFR(M) : 8210732 : remove jdk.testlibrary.Utils

Alan, JC, thank you both for review -- Igor > On Sep 13, 2018, at 11:53 PM, Alan Bateman wrote: > > > > On 14/09/2018 01:07, Igor Ignatyev wrote: >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev//8210732/webrev.00/index.html >>> 478 lines changed: 3 ins; 319 del; 156 mo

RFR(XS) : 8210779 : 8182404 and 8210732 haven't updated copyright years

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev//8210779/webrev.00/index.html > 36 lines changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 36 mod; Hi all, could you please review this small and trivial follow-up fix for 8182404 and 8210732? I have forgot to update copyright years as a part of these two changesets, this patch

RFR(M) : 8210732 : remove jdk.testlibrary.Utils

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev//8210732/webrev.00/index.html > 478 lines changed: 3 ins; 319 del; 156 mod; Hi all, could you please review the next clean up in jdk testlibrary which removes jdk.testlibrary.Utils class? webrev:

Re: RFR: 8219571: ProblemList serviceability/sa/TestJmapCoreMetaspace.java

Hi Stefan, LGTM. -- Igor > On Feb 22, 2019, at 1:00 PM, Stefan Karlsson > wrote: > > Hi all, > > Please review this patch to ProblemList > serviceability/sa/TestJmapCoreMetaspace.java > > https://cr.openjdk.java.net/~stefank/8219571/webrev.01/ >

RFR(T) : 8209455 : [error-prone] JdkObsolete in jdk.management.agent

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev//8209455/webrev.00 > 2 lines changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 2 mod; Hi all, could you please review this trivial cleanup which replaces StringBuffer by StringBuilder in jdk.management.agent module? webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev/8209455/webrev.00/

Re: RFR(T) : 8209455 : [error-prone] JdkObsolete in jdk.management.agent

3/02/2019 00:01, Igor Ignatyev wrote: >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev//8209455/webrev.00 >>> 2 lines changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 2 mod; >> >> Hi all, >> >> could you please review this trivial cleanup which replaces StringBuffer by >> Strin

Re: RFR(T) : 8209455 : [error-prone] JdkObsolete in jdk.management.agent

Thanks, JC! Alan, does webrev.01 look good to you? -- Igor > On Feb 13, 2019, at 2:42 PM, Jean Christophe Beyler > wrote: > > Hi Igor, > > Looks good to me :) > Jc > > On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 11:24 AM Igor Ignatyev <mailto:igor.ignat...@oracle.com>> wro

Re: RFR (12) JDK-8218025: disable pop_frame and force_early_return caps for Graal

Hi Alex, you have 'if INCLUDE_JVMCI' inside 'ifndef ZERO', although we currently don't have zero builds w/ JVMCI (and I don't think such builds would make much sense), it's better not to rely on that. not a blocker from my point of view though. Thanks, -- Igor > On Jan 31, 2019, at 10:38

Re: RFR (12) JDK-8218025: disable pop_frame and force_early_return caps for Graal

> + // Workaround for 8195635: > + // disable pop_frame and force_early_return capabilities with Graal > +#if INCLUDE_JVMCI > + if (UseJVMCICompiler) { > +jc.can_pop_frame = 0; > +jc.can_force_early_return = 0; > + } > +#endif // INCLUDE_JVMCI > On Jan 31,

Re: RFR (12) JDK-8218025: disable pop_frame and force_early_return caps for Graal

Hi Alex, UseJVMCICompiler is declared only if INCLUDE_JVMCI is defined, so your current patch will break builds where it's undefined. the rest (esp. problem list ;) ) looks good to me. adding hotspot-compiler alias. Thanks, -- Igor > On Jan 30, 2019, at 5:27 PM, Alex Menkov wrote: > > Hi

Re: RFR (12) JDK-8218025: disable pop_frame and force_early_return caps for Graal

from my point of view, having the following code at the end of JvmtiManageCapabilities::init_onload_capabilities is much clear and easier to understand: > // Workaround for 8195635: disable pop_frame and force_early_return > capabilities > #if INCLUDE_JVMCI > if (UseJVMCICompiler) { >

Re: RFR: 8231296: ZGC: vmTestbase/nsk/jvmti/Allocate/alloc001/ fails

his test will be re-enabled again as part of fixing >>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8231552 >>> >>> and that confirms that the issue is planned to be resolved. I'm not >>> sure that I agree that 8231552 is an RFE rather than a bug, but that's &g

Re: RFR: 8231296: ZGC: vmTestbase/nsk/jvmti/Allocate/alloc001/ fails

Hi Per, wouldn't it be better to put this test into zgc-specific problem list (test/hotspot/jtreg/ProblemList-zgc.txt)? Thanks, -- Igor > On Sep 26, 2019, at 1:39 PM, Per Liden wrote: > > Please review this one-liner to disable > vmTestbase/nsk/jvmti/Allocate/alloc001 when using ZGC. The

RFR(S) : 8233462 : serviceability/tmtools/jstat tests times out with -Xcomp

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev//8233462/webrev.00 > 33 lines changed: 1 ins; 14 del; 18 mod; Hi all, could you please review this small fix for tmtools testlibrary? tmtools tests are believed to fail due to a deadlock-like situation b/w main test process and tmtools process: (from JBS) >

RFR(T) : 8235353 : clean up hotspot problem lists

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev//8235353/webrev.00 > 9 lines changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 9 mod; Hi all, could you please review this small and trivial cleanup which returns serviceablility/sa tests back to execution on linux-ppc64. the tests were problem listed due to 8211767[1], which is

Re: RFR (XXS): 8235280: UnProblemList vmTestbase/nsk/jvmti/GetThreadState/thrstat001/TestDescription.java

LGTM -- Igor > On Dec 3, 2019, at 11:29 AM, serguei.spit...@oracle.com wrote: > > Please, review a trivial fix for sub-task: > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8235280 > > The fix is to remove the test from the ProblemList.txt: > > diff --git a/test/hotspot/jtreg/ProblemList.txt >

Re: RFR(T) : 8235353 : clean up hotspot problem lists

> > On 12/4/19 11:52 AM, Igor Ignatyev wrote: >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev//8235353/webrev.00 >>> 9 lines changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 9 mod; >> Hi all, >> could you please review this small and trivial cleanup which returns >> serviceablility/sa tests back

Re: RFR(T) : 8235353 : clean up hotspot problem lists

; -Original Message- >> From: Langer, Christoph >> Sent: Donnerstag, 5. Dezember 2019 12:24 >> To: Igor Ignatyev ; Doerr, Martin >> ; Lindenmaier, Goetz >> >> Cc: serviceability-dev ; Vladimir >> Kozlov ; hotspot-dev Source Developers >&g

Re: RFR(S) : 8233462 : serviceability/tmtools/jstat tests times out with -Xcomp

Hi Serguei, Thank you for your review and discussion around this issue. -- Igor > On Nov 18, 2019, at 3:56 PM, serguei.spit...@oracle.com wrote: > > Hi Igor, > > Looks good. > Thank you for taking care about this! > > Thanks, > Serguei > > > On 11/15/19

Re: RFR: 8238196: tests that use SA Attach should not be allowed to run against signed binaries on Mac OS X 10.14.5 and later

8238196 >>> <https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8238196> >>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~cjplummer/8238196/webrev.00 >>> <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~cjplummer/8238196/webrev.00> >>> >>> thanks, >>> >>> Chris >>> &

Re: RFR: 8238196: tests that use SA Attach should not be allowed to run against signed binaries on Mac OS X 10.14.5 and later

se; // assume not signed >>> } >> >> — Igor >> >>> On Feb 11, 2020, at 6:15 PM, Chris Plummer >> <mailto:chris.plum...@oracle.com>> wrote: >>> >>>  >>> Like this? >>> >>> } catch (InterruptedEx

Re: RFR: 8238196: tests that use SA Attach should not be allowed to run against signed binaries on Mac OS X 10.14.5 and later

I'd say yes, it's better to still call Thread::interrupt. -- Igor > On Feb 11, 2020, at 10:19 PM, Chris Plummer wrote: > > Ok. Should I still call interrupt()? > > Chris > > On 2/11/20 10:07 PM, Igor Ignatyev wrote: >> Hi Chris, >> >> that's a comm

Re: [14] RFR: 8238196: tests that use SA Attach should not be allowed to run against signed binaries on Mac OS X 10.14.5 and later

Hi Chris, http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~cjplummer/8236913/webrev.00 seems to be a webrev from another issue, should it have been http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~cjplummer/8238196/webrev.00/

Re: RFR: 8238196: tests that use SA Attach should not be allowed to run against signed binaries on Mac OS X 10.14.5 and later

g for exit. This then results in stopApp() getting >>>>> IllegalThreadStateException when calling Process.exitValue(). >>>>> >>>>> If I comment out the call to interrupt() in Platform.shouldSAAttach(), I >>>>> think the failure st

Re: RFR: 8238196: tests that use SA Attach should not be allowed to run against signed binaries on Mac OS X 10.14.5 and later

gt; did not think it is necessary since the code is only executed on OSX. > However, if you still feel allowing flexibility in the path separator is > important, I can add that change too. > > thanks, > > Chris > > On 2/10/20 1:34 PM, Igor Ignatyev wrote: >> Hi Ch

Re: RFR: 8238196: tests that use SA Attach should not be allowed to run against signed binaries on Mac OS X 10.14.5 and later

it is not right thing to do. -- Igor > On Feb 11, 2020, at 2:02 PM, Chris Plummer wrote: > > Hi Igor, > > I'm not sure what you mean by restore the interrupt state. Do you mean loop > back to the waitFor() call? > > thanks, > > Chris > > On 2/11/20 1:55

RFR(S/T) : 8242313 : use reproducible random in hotspot svc tests

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev//8242313/webrev.00 > 16 lines changed: 10 ins; 0 del; 6 mod; Hi all, could you please review the patch which updates hotspot/jtreg/serviceability tests in the same way as 8242310[1,2] updates compiler tests: > marks ... tests w/ randomness k/w and uses

Re: RFR(S) : 8242471 : remove "temporarily" restrictions of nsk/jdi/Argument/value/value004

ransports are attempted. I'm curious what the skipped transport is on > Windows. > > thanks, > > Chris > > On 4/9/20 2:43 PM, Igor Ignatyev wrote: >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev/8242471/webrev.00/ >>> 38 lines changed: 8 ins; 23 del; 7 mod; >> Hi

RFR(S) : 8242471 : remove "temporarily" restrictions of nsk/jdi/Argument/value/value004

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev/8242471/webrev.00/ > 38 lines changed: 8 ins; 23 del; 7 mod; Hi all, could you please review this small patch for nsk/jdi/Argument/value/value004 test? from JBS: > nsk/jdi/Argument/value/value004 test has restrictions to be run only on > solaris-sparc and

Re: RFR: 8242295: Move files from vmTestbase/nsk/monitoring/ThreadMBean into ThreadMXBean

ted ThreadMBean to ThreadMXBean in test descriptions for > ThreadMXBean tests . > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~lmesnik/8242295/webrev.01/ > <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~lmesnik/8242295/webrev.01/> > Leonid > > On 4/7/20 3:00 PM, Igor Ignatyev wrote: >> Hi Leonid, &

Re: RFR: 8242295: Move files from vmTestbase/nsk/monitoring/ThreadMBean into ThreadMXBean

ThreadMXBean > > to better describe changes > > Leonid > > On 4/7/20 4:06 PM, Igor Ignatyev wrote: >> great! what about nsk/monitoring/stress/thread/ ? they all have lines 'and >> states gotten via the ThreadMBean interface.' (strace010.java has 3 >&

Re: RFR: 8242295: Move files from vmTestbase/nsk/monitoring/ThreadMBean into ThreadMXBean

Hi Leonid, looks good and trivial to me. one question, will it also make sense to replace ThreadMBean w/ ThreadMXBean in test descriptions, e.g. at L#33 of test/hotspot/jtreg/vmTestbase/nsk/monitoring/ThreadMXBean/isCurrentThreadCpuTimeSupported/curthcputime001/TestDescription.java? Thanks, --

Re: RFR: 8242295: Move files from vmTestbase/nsk/monitoring/ThreadMBean into ThreadMXBean

020, at 4:49 PM, Leonid Mesnik wrote: > > Thank you for review. > > Filed > > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8242328 > <https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8242328> > Leonid > > On 4/7/20 4:31 PM, Igor Ignatyev wrote: >>

Re: RFR(S) : 8242471 : remove "temporarily" restrictions of nsk/jdi/Argument/value/value004

t;> Thanks Chris! Would you consider this trivial or should I wait for another >> review? >> >> — Igor >> >>> On Apr 9, 2020, at 8:35 PM, Chris Plummer >>> <mailto:chris.plum...@oracle.com> wrote: >>> >>>  >>> Hi Igor

Re: RFR(S/T) : 8242313 : use reproducible random in hotspot svc tests

ping? -- Igor > On Apr 8, 2020, at 10:21 AM, Igor Ignatyev wrote: > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev//8242313/webrev.00 >> 16 lines changed: 10 ins; 0 del; 6 mod; > > Hi all, > > could you please review the patch which updates hotspot/jtreg/serviceabili

Re: RFR(S) : 8242471 : remove "temporarily" restrictions of nsk/jdi/Argument/value/value004

Thanks Alex, pushed. -- Igor > On Apr 13, 2020, at 11:30 AM, Alex Menkov wrote: > > LGTM > > --alex > > On 04/13/2020 10:35, Igor Ignatyev wrote: >> sure. >> @alias, can I get a 2nd review for this patch? >> Thanks, >> -- Igor

Re: RFR(S/T) : 8242313 : use reproducible random in hotspot svc tests

Thanks Chris, pushed. -- Igor > On Apr 13, 2020, at 11:42 AM, Chris Plummer wrote: > > Looks good. > > thanks, > > Chris > > On 4/13/20 10:36 AM, Igor Ignatyev wrote: >> ping? >> -- Igor >> >>> On Apr 8, 2020, at 10:21 AM, Igo

Re: RFR(L) 8238268: Many SA tests are not running on OSX because they do not attempt to use sudo when available

HI Chris, overall looks good to me, a few comments though: 1. since you removed vm.hasSAandCanAttach from VMProps, you also need to remove it from all TEST.ROOT files which mention it (test/jdk/TEST.ROOT and test/hotspot/jtreg/TEST.ROOT) so people won't be confused by undefined property and

Re: RFR(L) 8238268: Many SA tests are not running on OSX because they do not attempt to use sudo when available

dk.java.net/~cjplummer/8238268/webrev.01/index.html> > > Also some comments inline below. > > On 3/13/20 9:26 AM, Igor Ignatyev wrote: >> HI Chris, >> >> overall looks good to me, a few comments though: >> 1. since you removed vm.hasSAandCanAttach from V

Re: RFR: 8240698: LingeredApp does not pass getTestJavaOpts() to the children process if vmArguments is already specified

Hi Leonid, I have briefly looked at the patch, a few comments so far: test/hotspot/jtreg/serviceability/sa/ClhsdbFlags.java: - at L#114, could you please call static method using class name (as the opposite of using instance)? or was it meant to be theApp.runAppVmOpts(vmArgs) ?

Re: RFR: 8240698: LingeredApp does not pass getTestJavaOpts() to the children process if vmArguments is already specified

startAppExactJvmOpts(theApp, > Utils.appendTestJavaOpts(additionalJvmOpts)); > +} > > Leonid > > On 3/25/20 10:14 AM, Stefan Karlsson wrote: >> On 2020-03-25 17:40, Igor Ignatyev wrote: >>> Hi Leonid, >>> >>> I have briefly looked at the patch,

Re: RFR: 8240698: LingeredApp does not pass getTestJavaOpts() to the children process if vmArguments is already specified

s.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8241624> To change @run main... to > @run driver. > > Test ClhsdbJstack.java is updated. > > Still waiting for review from SVC team. > > webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~lmesnik/8240698/webrev.02/ > <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/

  1   2   3   4   >