Hi Gary,
+1
Thanks,
Serguei
On 2/12/19 11:24 AM, Chris Plummer wrote:
Hi Gary,
The changes look good.
thanks,
Chris
On 2/12/19 11:04 AM, gary.ad...@oracle.com wrote:
Successfully ran 100X {solaris,macosx,windows,linux} debug builds
for the tests impacted by Debugee.endDebugee() processing.
|test/hotspot/jtreg/vmTestbase/nsk/jdi
test/hotspot/jtreg/vmTestbase/vm/mlvm test/jdk/com/sun/jdi|
On 2/12/19 7:40 AM, Gary Adams wrote:
On 2/12/19, 7:14 AM, David Holmes wrote:
On 12/02/2019 10:11 pm, Gary Adams wrote:
Yes, see the revised webrev, we do have to guard against
multiple calls to dispose, e.g. catch and ignore
VMDisconnectException.
We don't need to guard against a null vm. That would only exist if
the vm was never initialized and we were shutting down.
Okay. Revised webrev is better in that regard.
One more round to add the import for VMDisconnectedException.
Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~gadams/8218754/webrev.01/
There is a race condition between the debuggee and the debugger
process.
In the original endDebugee, it attempted to do 2 things in parallel.
By calling dispose then waitFor, in most cases the debugee would
finish
and report status before all the dispose operations completed.
But some tests would fail if the dispose happened quicker than the
debuggee
could report final exit status.
The tests based on JDIBreakpointTest on the other hand don't really
care about the the final exit status. Once all the events have
been seen and handled, the test wants to shutdown the session.
I'm still not seeing how JDIBreakpointTest started
hanging/timing-out after you switched the order of dispose and
waitFor. Does dispose affect the debuggee process or the debugger
process?
The JDIBreakpointTest would timeout on the endDebugee call to waitFor.
There was no reason for the debugee to exit at that point.
The call to dispose, provided the debugee with it's reason to exit.
Not sure which operation induces the debugee to exit.
Thanks,
David
On 2/12/19, 6:59 AM, David Holmes wrote:
Hi Gary,
On 12/02/2019 8:08 pm, gary.ad...@oracle.com wrote:
The recent change to JDK-8068225 changed the order of operations
in Debugee.endDebugee() to wait for the debugee to exit before
disposing of the vm on the debugger side of the connection.
For the tests based on JDIBreakpointTest the debuggee exit
status is not used and the tests relied on the
debugger side dispose operation to end the test.
Since JDIBreakpointTest already includes a call to wait for
the debugee, if does not need to use endDebuggee()
to dispose and wait for the debugee to finish.
I agree that potentially calling waitFor twice seems pointless.
But how did the reordering of vm.dispose() and waitFor() cause
all these tests to hang if they were waiting anyway? Does
vm.dispose() have an effect on destroying the process?
Also what concerns me is that dispose() is not resilient the way
that endDebuggee is:
public void dispose() {
vm.dispose();
}
versus
public int endDebugee() {
if (vm != null) {
try {
vm.dispose();
} catch (VMDisconnectedException ignore) {
}
vm = null;
}
Do we need to be concerned with a null VM or getting
VMDisconnectedException?
Thanks,
David
Testing in progress. The vm/mlvm tests are included in tiers 2,
3 and 6.
diff --git
a/test/hotspot/jtreg/vmTestbase/vm/mlvm/share/jdi/JDIBreakpointTest.java
b/test/hotspot/jtreg/vmTestbase/vm/mlvm/share/jdi/JDIBreakpointTest.java
---
a/test/hotspot/jtreg/vmTestbase/vm/mlvm/share/jdi/JDIBreakpointTest.java
+++
b/test/hotspot/jtreg/vmTestbase/vm/mlvm/share/jdi/JDIBreakpointTest.java
@@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
/*
- * Copyright (c) 2011, 2018, Oracle and/or its affiliates. All
rights reserved.
+ * Copyright (c) 2011, 2019, Oracle and/or its affiliates. All
rights reserved.
* DO NOT ALTER OR REMOVE COPYRIGHT NOTICES OR THIS FILE HEADER.
*
* This code is free software; you can redistribute it and/or
modify it
@@ -359,7 +359,7 @@
}.go();
if (!debuggee.terminated())
- debuggee.endDebugee();
+ debuggee.dispose();
debuggee.waitFor();
return true;
