Changes look good to me. Misha On 6/2/2015 11:55 AM, Chris Plummer wrote:

I'm going to have to separate out the ProcessTool.java changes into a separate changeset (and CR). In the meantime, feel free to review what I have below. The code won't be changing at all when I separate out the ProcessTool.java changes.

thanks,

Chris

On 6/2/15 12:36 AM, Chris Plummer wrote:

...

[Adding core-libs-dev@openjdk.java.net since this update includes changes to jdk/test library code]

Please review the updated webrev:

Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~cjplummer/8054386/webrev.02/ Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8054386

There were concerns about the new hotspot tests referencing jdk tests. One concern was that if the jdk tests change, they could break the hotspot tests, and this might initially go undetected. The other concern is that if the jdk and hotspot tests are placed in separate test bundles, then it would not be possible to run the hotspot tests.

Because of these concerns, I moved the tests that were in hotspot/test/runtime/CDSJDITests to instead be in jdk/test/com/sun/jdi/CDSJDITests. There was a slight renaming of the tests in the process. Also, I had to update the jdk version of ProcessTool.java to include the createJavaProcessBuilder() variant that is in the hotspot version of ProcessTool.java.

Lastly, in CDSJITTest.java I changed:

OutputAnalyzer output = new OutputAnalyzer(pb.start());

to instead be:

OutputAnalyzer output = ProcessTools.executeProcess(pb);

I had to do this since the jdk version of the OutputAnalyzer constructor is not public. The 1st version is what is commonly used in hostspot tests, and the 2nd version is what is commonly used in jdk tests. I decided to adopt the jdk way rather than make the OutputAnalyzer constructors public, although this will probably happen eventually when the two versions are unified.

thanks,

Chris

On 5/19/15 7:25 AM, Chris Plummer wrote:

...

Hi,

Please review the following changes for allowing java debugging when CDS is enabled.

Webrev:http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~cjplummer/8054386/webrev.01/ Bug:https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8054386

The VM changes are simple. I removed the check that prevents debugging with CDS enabled, and added logic that will map the CDS archive RW when debugging is enabled.

The tests are a bit more complex. There are a bunch of existing JDI tests for testing debugging support. Rather than start from scratch or clone them, I instead just wrote wrapper tests that put the relevant JDI test classes in the archive, and then invoke the JDI test. I did this for 3 of the JDI tests. If you feel there are others that would be good candidates, I'd be happy to add them. I'm looking for ones that would result in modification of the RO class metadata, such as setting a breakpoint (for which I already added two tests).

Testing done: -Using JPRT to run the new jtreg tests on all platforms. -Using JPRT to run all jtreg runtime tests on linux x86 and x_64. -Regular JPRT "-testset hotspot" run -Putting the JCK JVMTI tests in the archive and then running them. -Putting the nsk jdb, jdwp, jvmti, and jdi tests in the archive and then running them. -Putting a simple test class in the archive and then setting a breakpoint on it using jdb

Some of the above testing resulted in the discovery of bugs that still need to be addressed: JDK-8078644, JDK-8078730, and JDK-8079181.

I also verified that without the change to map the archive RW, the above testing resulted in a SEGV, which is what you would expect (and actually want to see to prove that the testing is effective).

thanks,

Chris

Hi David, Here's an updated webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~cjplummer/8054386/webrev.04/ thanks, Chris On 6/3/15 11:29 PM, David Holmes wrote:

Hi Chris,

Hotspot change is good.

Only a couple of style nits with the tests (where are our Java style guidelines ???). Taking CDSJDITest.java as an example:

If you are okay with this line length:

115 public static OutputAnalyzer executeAndLog(ProcessBuilder pb, String logName) throws Exception {

then you can remove a number of line breaks in the headers of other functions. (I don't follow the 70-80 char line length dogma ;) )

If you do break a header of a function the { still stays on the same line as the last header component ie:

private static void addToClassList(PrintStream ps, String classes[]) throws IOException {

not:

139 private static void addToClassList(PrintStream ps, String classes[]) 140 throws IOException 141 {

Cheers, David

On 2/06/2015 5:36 PM, Chris Plummer wrote:

...

[Adding core-libs-dev@openjdk.java.net since this update includes changes to jdk/test library code]

Please review the updated webrev:

Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~cjplummer/8054386/webrev.02/ Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8054386

There were concerns about the new hotspot tests referencing jdk tests. One concern was that if the jdk tests change, they could break the hotspot tests, and this might initially go undetected. The other concern is that if the jdk and hotspot tests are placed in separate test bundles, then it would not be possible to run the hotspot tests.

Because of these concerns, I moved the tests that were in hotspot/test/runtime/CDSJDITests to instead be in jdk/test/com/sun/jdi/CDSJDITests. There was a slight renaming of the tests in the process. Also, I had to update the jdk version of ProcessTool.java to include the createJavaProcessBuilder() variant that is in the hotspot version of ProcessTool.java.

Lastly, in CDSJITTest.java I changed:

OutputAnalyzer output = new OutputAnalyzer(pb.start());

to instead be:

OutputAnalyzer output = ProcessTools.executeProcess(pb);

I had to do this since the jdk version of the OutputAnalyzer constructor is not public. The 1st version is what is commonly used in hostspot tests, and the 2nd version is what is commonly used in jdk tests. I decided to adopt the jdk way rather than make the OutputAnalyzer constructors public, although this will probably happen eventually when the two versions are unified.

thanks,

Chris

On 5/19/15 7:25 AM, Chris Plummer wrote:

...

Hi,

Please review the following changes for allowing java debugging when CDS is enabled.

Webrev:http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~cjplummer/8054386/webrev.01/ Bug:https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8054386

The VM changes are simple. I removed the check that prevents debugging with CDS enabled, and added logic that will map the CDS archive RW when debugging is enabled.

The tests are a bit more complex. There are a bunch of existing JDI tests for testing debugging support. Rather than start from scratch or clone them, I instead just wrote wrapper tests that put the relevant JDI test classes in the archive, and then invoke the JDI test. I did this for 3 of the JDI tests. If you feel there are others that would be good candidates, I'd be happy to add them. I'm looking for ones that would result in modification of the RO class metadata, such as setting a breakpoint (for which I already added two tests).

Testing done: -Using JPRT to run the new jtreg tests on all platforms. -Using JPRT to run all jtreg runtime tests on linux x86 and x_64. -Regular JPRT "-testset hotspot" run -Putting the JCK JVMTI tests in the archive and then running them. -Putting the nsk jdb, jdwp, jvmti, and jdi tests in the archive and then running them. -Putting a simple test class in the archive and then setting a breakpoint on it using jdb

Some of the above testing resulted in the discovery of bugs that still need to be addressed: JDK-8078644, JDK-8078730, and JDK-8079181.

I also verified that without the change to map the archive RW, the above testing resulted in a SEGV, which is what you would expect (and actually want to see to prove that the testing is effective).

thanks,

Chris

On 5/06/2015 9:32 AM, Chris Plummer wrote:

Hi David,

Here's an updated webrev:

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~cjplummer/8054386/webrev.04/

Thanks - should have said updated webrev not necessary :) Looks good. David

thanks,

Chris

On 6/3/15 11:29 PM, David Holmes wrote:

...

Hi Chris,

Hotspot change is good.

Only a couple of style nits with the tests (where are our Java style guidelines ???). Taking CDSJDITest.java as an example:

If you are okay with this line length:

115 public static OutputAnalyzer executeAndLog(ProcessBuilder pb, String logName) throws Exception {

then you can remove a number of line breaks in the headers of other functions. (I don't follow the 70-80 char line length dogma ;) )

If you do break a header of a function the { still stays on the same line as the last header component ie:

private static void addToClassList(PrintStream ps, String classes[]) throws IOException {

not:

139 private static void addToClassList(PrintStream ps, String classes[]) 140 throws IOException 141 {

Cheers, David

On 2/06/2015 5:36 PM, Chris Plummer wrote:

...

[Adding core-libs-dev@openjdk.java.net since this update includes changes to jdk/test library code]

Please review the updated webrev:

Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~cjplummer/8054386/webrev.02/ Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8054386

There were concerns about the new hotspot tests referencing jdk tests. One concern was that if the jdk tests change, they could break the hotspot tests, and this might initially go undetected. The other concern is that if the jdk and hotspot tests are placed in separate test bundles, then it would not be possible to run the hotspot tests.

Because of these concerns, I moved the tests that were in hotspot/test/runtime/CDSJDITests to instead be in jdk/test/com/sun/jdi/CDSJDITests. There was a slight renaming of the tests in the process. Also, I had to update the jdk version of ProcessTool.java to include the createJavaProcessBuilder() variant that is in the hotspot version of ProcessTool.java.

Lastly, in CDSJITTest.java I changed:

OutputAnalyzer output = new OutputAnalyzer(pb.start());

to instead be:

OutputAnalyzer output = ProcessTools.executeProcess(pb);

I had to do this since the jdk version of the OutputAnalyzer constructor is not public. The 1st version is what is commonly used in hostspot tests, and the 2nd version is what is commonly used in jdk tests. I decided to adopt the jdk way rather than make the OutputAnalyzer constructors public, although this will probably happen eventually when the two versions are unified.

thanks,

Chris

On 5/19/15 7:25 AM, Chris Plummer wrote:

...

Hi,

Please review the following changes for allowing java debugging when CDS is enabled.

Webrev:http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~cjplummer/8054386/webrev.01/ Bug:https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8054386

The VM changes are simple. I removed the check that prevents debugging with CDS enabled, and added logic that will map the CDS archive RW when debugging is enabled.

The tests are a bit more complex. There are a bunch of existing JDI tests for testing debugging support. Rather than start from scratch or clone them, I instead just wrote wrapper tests that put the relevant JDI test classes in the archive, and then invoke the JDI test. I did this for 3 of the JDI tests. If you feel there are others that would be good candidates, I'd be happy to add them. I'm looking for ones that would result in modification of the RO class metadata, such as setting a breakpoint (for which I already added two tests).

Testing done: -Using JPRT to run the new jtreg tests on all platforms. -Using JPRT to run all jtreg runtime tests on linux x86 and x_64. -Regular JPRT "-testset hotspot" run -Putting the JCK JVMTI tests in the archive and then running them. -Putting the nsk jdb, jdwp, jvmti, and jdi tests in the archive and then running them. -Putting a simple test class in the archive and then setting a breakpoint on it using jdb

Some of the above testing resulted in the discovery of bugs that still need to be addressed: JDK-8078644, JDK-8078730, and JDK-8079181.

I also verified that without the change to map the archive RW, the above testing resulted in a SEGV, which is what you would expect (and actually want to see to prove that the testing is effective).

thanks,

Chris