On Fri, 14 Aug 2026 13:47:02 GMT, Shiv Shah <[email protected]> wrote:
> Old jdi debugee classes keep their own verbose flag and only print their > trace when the debugger passes -vbs. logs you cannot see until a rerun are > useless for failures that do not reproduce, so the gating goes and the > messages always print. 65 files here, the flag and its -vbs parsing are > deleted and the little print helper becomes an unconditional display on > stderr. two debugger classes carried a flag that nothing ever set, that dead > code is just removed. the remaining files with the same pattern overlap open > reviews and follow separately. output volume is a handful of lines per > debugee. > > PS: Checked log size against a full nsk/jdi in CI run and none of the > changed tests hit the jtreg output limit. Largest .jtr was about 100 KB, and > this change adds only around a dozen short protocol lines per debuggee. The > tests that do trip the overflow marker are the monitor and stress event > tests. which aren’t modified here and were already doing so before this > change. > > > --------- > - [x] I confirm that I make this contribution in accordance with the [OpenJDK > Interim AI Policy](https://openjdk.org/legal/ai). Nice cleanup. These don't seem too noisy so there isn't a reason to suppress these messages. I had a couple of suggestions/questions. Thanks! test/hotspot/jtreg/vmTestbase/nsk/jdi/Accessible/isPrivate/isPrivate001a.java line 83: > 81: > 82: private static void display(String message) { > 83: System.err.println(message); Can you change these to log.display? and not have a display method here at all? test/hotspot/jtreg/vmTestbase/nsk/jdi/ReferenceType/name/name002a.java line 60: > 58: try { > 59: classUnloader.loadClass(checked_class_name, > checked_class_dir); > 60: display Can you make some of these one line? ------------- PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/32375#pullrequestreview-5009391919 PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/32375#discussion_r3844765576 PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/32375#discussion_r3844790831
