Hi Sergey, Sorry, I pushed it just now! If you (or anybody else) has any objections I can revert this or do a follow-up to correct it. Please let me know.
Best regards, Goetz. > -----Original Message----- > From: Sergey Bylokhov [mailto:sergey.bylok...@oracle.com] > Sent: Freitag, 17. Juni 2016 16:21 > To: Lindenmaier, Goetz <goetz.lindenma...@sap.com>; Alexandr Scherbatiy > <alexandr.scherba...@oracle.com>; Volker Simonis > <volker.simo...@gmail.com> > Cc: awt-...@openjdk.java.net; swing-dev@openjdk.java.net; 2d-dev <2d- > d...@openjdk.java.net> > Subject: Re: <Swing Dev> <AWT Dev> RFR(L): 8159690: [TESTBUG] Mark > headful tests with @key headful. > > I guess that 2d team should review it as well (cc) > > On 17.06.16 17:17, Lindenmaier, Goetz wrote: > > Hi Alexandr, > > > > Thanks for reviewing! > > > > Best regards, > > Goetz. > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Alexandr Scherbatiy [mailto:alexandr.scherba...@oracle.com] > >> Sent: Freitag, 17. Juni 2016 16:04 > >> To: Volker Simonis <volker.simo...@gmail.com> > >> Cc: Lindenmaier, Goetz <goetz.lindenma...@sap.com>; swing- > >> d...@openjdk.java.net; awt-...@openjdk.java.net > >> Subject: Re: <Swing Dev> <AWT Dev> RFR(L): 8159690: [TESTBUG] Mark > >> headful tests with @key headful. > >> > >> > >> The change looks good to me. > >> > >> Thanks, > >> Alexandr. > >> > >> On 6/17/2016 4:54 PM, Volker Simonis wrote: > >>> On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 3:40 PM, Alexandr Scherbatiy > >>> <alexandr.scherba...@oracle.com> wrote: > >>>> On 6/17/2016 4:17 PM, Lindenmaier, Goetz wrote: > >>>>> Hi Alexandr, > >>>>> > >>>>> yes, you are right, the test you mention is missing in this change. > >>>>> There are others, too, and we still have lots of failures for other > >>>>> reasons. > >>>>> > >>>>> We are currently working on getting all the tests green in > >>>>> our test environment where we test linuxppc64, linuxppc64le > >>>>> and aixppc64 (and, for reference, the Oracle platforms). > >>>>> So I will address all the remaining issues at some point. > >>>>> > >>>>> If you basically agree on this change, I would appreciate if we > >>>>> could push this one and I make a follow up change. Handling > >>>>> changes with this many files is a pain point. But I can also > >>>>> extend this change so that we get all of them at once. > >>>> > >>>> As I see there are areas like jdk_beans or jdk_imageio which usually > >> does > >>>> not require headful environment and jdk_awt or jdk_swing which > usually > >>>> requires it. It seems that ordinary AWT/Swing tests require the > "headful" > >>>> keyword. > >>>> > >>>> May be it is more appropriate to have "headful" keyword for areas > like > >>>> jdk_beans and "headless" keyword for areas like jdk_awt and > jdk_swing? > >> This > >>>> will allow to mark only small part of tests with necessary keyword for > each > >>>> area. > >>>> > >>> While this approach sounds desirable, I'm not aware of functionality > >>> in jtreg which allows marking all the tests in a test group (e.g. > >>> jdk_awt) with a special default keyword which can be override in the > >>> test itself. > >>> > >>> After all, the author of a test should know best if his test requires > >>> a headful environment or not. I think after we've gone trough the > >>> initial pain of marking all headful test, the future development > >>> should then be straightforward and simple. > >>> > >>>> In other way almost all AWT/Swing tests should be marked by > "headful" > >>>> keyword. > >>>> > >>>> Thanks, > >>>> Alexandr. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> Best regards, > >>>>> Goetz. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>> -----Original Message----- > >>>>>> From: Alexandr Scherbatiy [mailto:alexandr.scherba...@oracle.com] > >>>>>> Sent: Freitag, 17. Juni 2016 14:53 > >>>>>> To: Volker Simonis <volker.simo...@gmail.com> > >>>>>> Cc: Lindenmaier, Goetz <goetz.lindenma...@sap.com>; swing- > >>>>>> d...@openjdk.java.net; awt-...@openjdk.java.net > >>>>>> Subject: Re: <Swing Dev> <AWT Dev> RFR(L): 8159690: [TESTBUG] > >> Mark > >>>>>> headful tests with @key headful. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On 6/17/2016 11:36 AM, Volker Simonis wrote: > >>>>>>> On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 5:55 PM, Alexandr Scherbatiy > >>>>>>> <alexandr.scherba...@oracle.com> wrote: > >>>>>>>> On 6/16/2016 5:40 PM, Lindenmaier, Goetz wrote: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Hi, > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> we have test machines without X server. On these many of the > jdk > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> jtreg tests fail with a headless exception. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> We grepped for this exception in the test output and identified > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> about 450 tests. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> In these tests, we added with another script "@key headful". > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> What is a number of tests which passe in headless mode? > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> I would expect that an ordinary client test which use Frame and > >>>>>>>> fails in > >>>>>>>> headless mode does not require a special key by default. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Hi Alexandr, > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> I don't quite understand your concerns, but the purpose of this > >> change > >>>>>>> is to make it possible to simply exclude all tests which require a > >>>>>>> "headful" environment from a jtreg run. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> There are AWT/Swing tests which can be run even without X > server. > >> For > >>>>>> example: > >>>>>>> java/awt/image/DrawImage/DrawImageCoordsTest.java > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Others, like for example: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> java/awt/image/DrawImage/EABlitTest.jtr > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> will throw a Headless exception and fail: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> java.awt.HeadlessException: > >>>>>>> No X11 DISPLAY variable was set, but this program performed an > >>>>>>> operation which requires it. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> With Goetz's change we can simply exclude all the test which > require > >> a > >>>>>>> headful environment by specifying "-keywords:\!headful" to jtreg. > >>>>>>> After all, I think that's the purpose why the "headful" keyword has > >>>>>>> been introduced. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> If there's any other simple way of excluding all tests which require a > >>>>>>> headful environment, please let us now. > >>>>>> For example, the test > >>>>>> jdk/test/javax/swing/AbstractButton/6711682/bug6711682.java > when > >> it is > >>>>>> run with -Djava.awt.headless=true option fails with exception > >>>>>> "java.awt.AWTException: headless environment". > >>>>>> > >>>>>> The test is not listed in the proposed patch. Is it correct that > >>>>>> this > >>>>>> test requires the "headful" environment and should be marked with > >> the > >>>>>> "headful" keyword? > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Thanks, > >>>>>> Alexandr. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> Regards, > >>>>>>> Volker > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Thanks, > >>>>>>>> Alexandr. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> So that the script generates better output, I adapted the > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> formatting of some of the test descriptions. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> see also the text in the webrev, where I posted some incremental > >> diffs > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> of the changes I more or less edited by hand. I hope this eases > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> reviewing :) > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Last, I updated the Copyrights with the script by Coleen. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Please review this change. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~goetz/wr16/8159690- > >> headful/webrev.01/ > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Best regards, > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Goetz. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > > > > > -- > Best regards, Sergey.
