On Sun, 2 Aug 2026 22:48:51 GMT, David Holmes <[email protected]> wrote:
>> I rewrote this to loop 100 times instead then reporting failure if it >> doesn't pass within 100 times. I hope this test won't be cursed on slower >> systems or windows. > > The "loop forever" version would trigger the timeout handler and then we > would get a core etc and be able to see why it has not completed. Now we will > just fail but we won't know why. I see the point. The loop forever version will give a core file or an mdmp file. I don't know how else to account for less reliable systems that we might run this test on. ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/32092#discussion_r3706718471
