On Wed, 30 Apr 2025 18:33:31 GMT, Kevin Walls <kev...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> test/jdk/com/sun/management/OperatingSystemMXBean/GetProcessCpuLoad.java
>> line 60:
>>
>>> 58: // A good reading: forget any previous -1.
>>> 59: ex = null;
>>> 60: good++;
>>
>> The `ex = null` is a little misleading because actually it's irrelevant. An
>> error on the next iteration will set it again, but it will be ignored
>> because `good != 0`.
>
> Yes, as long as there is a good value captured, Windows should pass.
> We could get into how many good values we should see, I might suggest 6 out
> of 10? But that seems like a guessing game.
> The breakage in this feature before meant it could never return a good value,
> that's what we need to guard against.
I would simplify to
for (int i = 0; i < TEST_COUNT; i++) {
double load = mbean.getProcessCpuLoad();
if (load == -1.0 && Platform.isWindows()) {
// Some Windows 2019 systems can return -1 for the first few
reads.
// Remember a -1 in case it never gets better.
// Some Windows systems can return -1 occasionally, at any time.
// Will fail if we never see good values.
} else if (load < 0.0 || load > 1.0) {
throw new RuntimeException("getProcessCpuLoad() returns " + load
+ " which is not in the [0.0,1.0] interval");
} else {
// we got at least one load from 0.0 to 1.0, that's good to pass
on Wiindows
good++;
}
try {
Thread.sleep(200);
}
}
if (good == 0 && Platform.isWindows()) {
// Never get any good results on Windows 2019
throw throw new RuntimeException("getProcessCpuLoad() returns
always -1.0 on Windows in 10 attempts. ");
}
}
does it makes a sense?
-------------
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/24961#discussion_r2069432691
