Katja, I intentionally did not include javaoptions when launching the new JVMs since I could not think of any options that would affect how -agentlib:jdwp=suspend=y|n works or does not work (which is what this test verifies).
/Staffan On 1 jul 2014, at 17:03, Yekaterina Kantserova <yekaterina.kantser...@oracle.com> wrote: > Staffan, > > since I'm working on JDK-8048892 right now I happen to know > test/com/sun/jdi/ProcessAttachTest.sh has used @debuggeeVMOptions. > > ProcessBuilder pb = ProcessTools.createJavaProcessBuilder(...) > > will not add test.vm.options and test.java.options to the command line. You > need to use: > > ProcessBuilder pb = > ProcessTools.createJavaProcessBuilder(Utils.addTestJavaOpts(...)) > > You can look at the ProcessTools.executeTestJvm() for more information. > > Thanks, > Katja > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: daniel.daughe...@oracle.com > To: staffan.lar...@oracle.com > Cc: serviceability-dev@openjdk.java.net > Sent: Tuesday, July 1, 2014 3:37:38 PM GMT +01:00 Amsterdam / Berlin / Bern / > Rome / Stockholm / Vienna > Subject: Re: RFR: 8046883 com/sun/jdi/ProcessAttachTest.sh gets > "java.io.IOException: Invalid process identifier" on windows > > On 6/23/14 2:33 AM, Staffan Larsen wrote: > Fancy! > > new review: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sla/8046883/webrev.01/ > > test/com/sun/jdi/ProcessAttachTest.java > New test looks very good. There's a couple of really long lines, > but I can't think of a way to break the lines that makes sense > with this new streams coding style. > > Thumbs up. > > Dan > > > > /Staffan > > On 18 jun 2014, at 13:59, Peter Allwin <peter.all...@oracle.com> wrote: > > This looks a lot better! > > (Since we’re using fancy new features we could use streams to find the > connector instance) > > AttachingConnector ac = > Bootstrap.virtualMachineManager().attachingConnectors() > .stream() > .filter(c -> c.name().equals("com.sun.jdi.ProcessAttach")) > .findFirst() > .orElseThrow(() -> new RuntimeException("Unable to locate > ProcessAttachingConnector")); > > Thanks! > /peter > > On 17 Jun 2014, at 19:46, Staffan Larsen <staffan.lar...@oracle.com> wrote: > > Here is a rewrite of the test in Java instead of a shell script. Should be > easier to maintain. > > webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sla/8046883/webrev.00/ > > Thanks, > /Staffan > > On 17 jun 2014, at 15:12, Staffan Larsen <staffan.lar...@oracle.com> wrote: > > > On 17 jun 2014, at 15:03, Alan Bateman <alan.bate...@oracle.com> wrote: > > On 17/06/2014 13:35, Staffan Larsen wrote: > : > > It could be a timing issue, but in the other direction. If cygwin hasn’t yet > started the real windows process when I run ps, then maybe ps will not list > it. But given the “sleep 2” before the ps invocation, the process should have > had time to started. No guarantees of course. > > Making the sleep shorter will not help as the process we are starting will > not terminate until we tell it to. > > > Okay, although what I was suggesting is to use your patch but additionally > move the sleep at L79 into the new while loop so that it doesn't spin quickly > through the 10 iterations. That would give the test 10 attempts (and 10 > seconds) to get the pid. > > Ah, I see. I misunderstood your comment. > > I started looking at rewriting the test in pure Java instead of the shell > script. With the new Process.getPid() this looks like the best approach. I’ll > come back with a new review request soon. > > /Staffan
