David Holmes wrote:
On 16/01/2014 9:01 PM, shanliang wrote:
Jaroslav Bachorik wrote:
On 16.1.2014 11:48, shanliang wrote:
David Holmes wrote:
On 16/01/2014 5:37 PM, shanliang wrote:
Hi,
Please review this simple fix, the test needs more time to wait
Phaser.awaitAdvanceInterruptibly(...).
Integer.MAX_VALUE? There's no point using a timed form at all.
David
Yes Phaser.awaitAdvanceInterruptibly(int phase) could be used here,
but
the call of this method is wrapped in:
jdk.testlibrary.ProcessTools.startProcess(...)
So we have to add a new method ProcessTools.startProcess(...) which
has
no timeout parameter. I did not do this because I thought to have a
simple fix only within the test.
This timeoud seems to be caused by using the fastdebug build. You
could use Utils.TIMEOUT_FACTOR to scale the original timeout (1500)
according to the parameters specified for tests running fastdebug
builds.
Yes it could be a solution, but to wait the jtreg timeout seems better,
we do not need to take care of timeout.
Okay. It would have been clearer if you had stated that you were
removing the timeout in the test and relying on jtreg timing out the
test instead. :)
Thanks David and Jaroslav for reviewing, I will push the first version.
Shanliang
Thanks,
David
Thanks,
Shanliang
-JB-
If this is useful, here is the new web:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sjiang/JDK-8029378/01/
Thanks,
Shanliang
webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sjiang/JDK-8029378/00/
bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8029378
Thanks,
Shanliang
