RFR[10] 8193460 : Take tools/launcher/TestXcheckJNIWarnings.java back off the ProblemList
Hi, Way back five days ago[1], TestXcheckJNIWarnings.java was added to the ProblemList. Well, with a couple of recent fixes[2][3], this test can be taken back off of the ProblemList. --- a/test/jdk/ProblemList.txt Fri Dec 08 13:04:43 2017 -0800 +++ b/test/jdk/ProblemList.txt Wed Dec 13 09:28:01 2017 -0800 @@ -257,7 +257,6 @@ tools/pack200/CommandLineTests.java 8059906 generic-all tools/launcher/FXLauncherTest.java 8068049 linux-all,macosx-all -tools/launcher/TestXcheckJNIWarnings.java 8190984 solaris-all tools/jimage/JImageExtractTest.java 8170120 generic-all Thanks, -Brent 1. http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2017-December/050496.ht... 2. https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8193222 3. https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8190984
+1 Paul.
On 13 Dec 2017, at 10:03, Brent Christian <brent.christian@oracle.com> wrote:
Hi,
Way back five days ago[1], TestXcheckJNIWarnings.java was added to the ProblemList. Well, with a couple of recent fixes[2][3], this test can be taken back off of the ProblemList.
--- a/test/jdk/ProblemList.txt Fri Dec 08 13:04:43 2017 -0800 +++ b/test/jdk/ProblemList.txt Wed Dec 13 09:28:01 2017 -0800 @@ -257,7 +257,6 @@ tools/pack200/CommandLineTests.java 8059906 generic-all
tools/launcher/FXLauncherTest.java 8068049 linux-all,macosx-all -tools/launcher/TestXcheckJNIWarnings.java 8190984 solaris-all
tools/jimage/JImageExtractTest.java 8170120 generic-all
Thanks, -Brent
1. http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2017-December/050496.ht... 2. https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8193222 3. https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8190984
+1 Mandy On 12/13/17 10:03 AM, Brent Christian wrote:
Hi,
Way back five days ago[1], TestXcheckJNIWarnings.java was added to the ProblemList. Well, with a couple of recent fixes[2][3], this test can be taken back off of the ProblemList.
--- a/test/jdk/ProblemList.txt Fri Dec 08 13:04:43 2017 -0800 +++ b/test/jdk/ProblemList.txt Wed Dec 13 09:28:01 2017 -0800 @@ -257,7 +257,6 @@ tools/pack200/CommandLineTests.java 8059906 generic-all
tools/launcher/FXLauncherTest.java 8068049 linux-all,macosx-all -tools/launcher/TestXcheckJNIWarnings.java 8190984 solaris-all
tools/jimage/JImageExtractTest.java 8170120 generic-all
Thanks, -Brent
1. http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2017-December/050496.ht... 2. https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8193222 3. https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8190984
Thank you, Paul and Mandy. -B
On 12/13/2017 10:03 AM, Brent Christian wrote:
Hi,
Way back five days ago[1], TestXcheckJNIWarnings.java was added to the ProblemList. Well, with a couple of recent fixes[2][3], this test can be taken back off of the ProblemList.
Good to see nimble usage of the problem list;,helps keep our test results clean all the time :-) -Joe
"Nimble" is one word for it... :D -B On 12/13/17 10:54 AM, joe darcy wrote:
Good to see nimble usage of the problem list;,helps keep our test results clean all the time :-)
-Joe
Brent, I already took care of this as part of the fix for 8190984. David On 14/12/2017 4:03 AM, Brent Christian wrote:
Hi,
Way back five days ago[1], TestXcheckJNIWarnings.java was added to the ProblemList. Well, with a couple of recent fixes[2][3], this test can be taken back off of the ProblemList.
--- a/test/jdk/ProblemList.txt Fri Dec 08 13:04:43 2017 -0800 +++ b/test/jdk/ProblemList.txt Wed Dec 13 09:28:01 2017 -0800 @@ -257,7 +257,6 @@ tools/pack200/CommandLineTests.java 8059906 generic-all
tools/launcher/FXLauncherTest.java 8068049 linux-all,macosx-all -tools/launcher/TestXcheckJNIWarnings.java 8190984 solaris-all
tools/jimage/JImageExtractTest.java 8170120 generic-all
Thanks, -Brent
1. http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2017-December/050496.ht...
2. https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8193222 3. https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8190984
On 14/12/2017 8:46 AM, David Holmes wrote:
Brent,
I already took care of this as part of the fix for 8190984.
Now the test will run again in jdk/jdk CI but the fixes are still only in jdk/hs. David
David
On 14/12/2017 4:03 AM, Brent Christian wrote:
Hi,
Way back five days ago[1], TestXcheckJNIWarnings.java was added to the ProblemList. Well, with a couple of recent fixes[2][3], this test can be taken back off of the ProblemList.
--- a/test/jdk/ProblemList.txt Fri Dec 08 13:04:43 2017 -0800 +++ b/test/jdk/ProblemList.txt Wed Dec 13 09:28:01 2017 -0800 @@ -257,7 +257,6 @@ tools/pack200/CommandLineTests.java 8059906 generic-all
tools/launcher/FXLauncherTest.java 8068049 linux-all,macosx-all -tools/launcher/TestXcheckJNIWarnings.java 8190984 solaris-all
tools/jimage/JImageExtractTest.java 8170120 generic-all
Thanks, -Brent
1. http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2017-December/050496.ht...
2. https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8193222 3. https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8190984
On 12/13/17 3:17 PM, David Holmes wrote:
I already took care of this as part of the fix for 8190984.
OK, thanks. Well, crud - my apologies to the person doing the merge later. :\ (I saw that the push went to jdk/hs, but didn't look closely. I guess you must have updated from jdk/jdk first...)
Now the test will run again in jdk/jdk CI but the fixes are still only in jdk/hs.
Yeah :{ Hopefully not for too long... -Brent
On 14/12/2017 9:24 AM, Brent Christian wrote:
On 12/13/17 3:17 PM, David Holmes wrote:
I already took care of this as part of the fix for 8190984.
OK, thanks. Well, crud - my apologies to the person doing the merge later. :\
(I saw that the push went to jdk/hs, but didn't look closely. I guess you must have updated from jdk/jdk first...)
Yes. Doing the pull down from jdk/jdk doesn't cause any issues.
Now the test will run again in jdk/jdk CI but the fixes are still only in jdk/hs.
Yeah :{ Hopefully not for too long...
At least a week I think as the next push up happens after the next hotspot PIT. David
-Brent
Brent, I'm going to manually import the missing changes from jdk/hs to jdk/jdk. I've conferred with Jesper and this shouldn't cause any problems. Though there may be a rather large merge changeset due to the just pushed changes to jdk/jdk. <sigh> David On 14/12/2017 9:28 AM, David Holmes wrote:
On 14/12/2017 9:24 AM, Brent Christian wrote:
On 12/13/17 3:17 PM, David Holmes wrote:
I already took care of this as part of the fix for 8190984.
OK, thanks. Well, crud - my apologies to the person doing the merge later. :\
(I saw that the push went to jdk/hs, but didn't look closely. I guess you must have updated from jdk/jdk first...)
Yes. Doing the pull down from jdk/jdk doesn't cause any issues.
Now the test will run again in jdk/jdk CI but the fixes are still only in jdk/hs.
Yeah :{ Hopefully not for too long...
At least a week I think as the next push up happens after the next hotspot PIT.
David
-Brent
On 14/12/2017 12:53 PM, David Holmes wrote:
Brent,
I'm going to manually import the missing changes from jdk/hs to jdk/jdk. I've conferred with Jesper and this shouldn't cause any problems. Though there may be a rather large merge changeset due to the just pushed changes to jdk/jdk. <sigh>
Unfortunately this was not possible as the changeset for 8190984 conflicts with this changeset (8193460). So the test will fail again in jdk/jdk until the changes make their way up from jdk/hs. If that is a concern then you will need to backout this changeset so that the test is problem-listed again. David
David
On 14/12/2017 9:28 AM, David Holmes wrote:
On 14/12/2017 9:24 AM, Brent Christian wrote:
On 12/13/17 3:17 PM, David Holmes wrote:
I already took care of this as part of the fix for 8190984.
OK, thanks. Well, crud - my apologies to the person doing the merge later. :\
(I saw that the push went to jdk/hs, but didn't look closely. I guess you must have updated from jdk/jdk first...)
Yes. Doing the pull down from jdk/jdk doesn't cause any issues.
Now the test will run again in jdk/jdk CI but the fixes are still only in jdk/hs.
Yeah :{ Hopefully not for too long...
At least a week I think as the next push up happens after the next hotspot PIT.
David
-Brent
On 12/13/17 8:59 PM, David Holmes wrote:
I'm going to manually import the missing changes from jdk/hs to jdk/jdk.
Unfortunately this was not possible as the changeset for 8190984 conflicts with this changeset (8193460). So the test will fail again in jdk/jdk until the changes make their way up from jdk/hs. If that is a concern then you will need to backout this changeset so that the test is problem-listed again.
Thanks for giving it a try. My view is that we made it through several weeks of having this intermittent failure on one platform. IMO we can survive with it for a little while longer until the merge. I've described the situation in the bug report. Thanks, -Brent
participants (5)
-
Brent Christian
-
David Holmes
-
joe darcy
-
mandy chung
-
Paul Sandoz