RFR: 8342988: GHA: Build JTReg in single step [v2]

[Magnus Ihse Bursie]

On Fri, 25 Oct 2024 17:12:52 GMT, Aleksey Shipilev <shade at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> It is visible in current GHA runs that building jtreg sometimes break on dependencies checkout, for example:
>> 
>> 
>> [build.sh][INFO] CYGWIN_OR_MSYS=0
>> [build.sh][INFO] JAVA_HOME: /usr/lib/jvm/temurin-17-jdk-amd64
>> [build.sh][INFO] Downloading https://archive.apache.org/dist/ant/binaries/apache-ant-1.10.8-bin.zip to /home/runner/work/jdk/jdk/jtreg/src/make/../build/deps/apache-ant-1.10.8-bin.zip
>> Error: sh][ERROR] wget exited with exit code 4
>> Error: Process completed with exit code 1.
>> 
>> 
>> I suppose this is a side-effect of pulling lots of dependencies all at once. Building jtreg on every platform exposes us to these issues more often. Additionally, we had problems with building jtreg on various platforms. 
>> 
>> We do not have to build jtreg for every platform. We can just have a job step that does it once, and stores it in the cache for all dependent jobs to use. It would also save some build time across various jobs.
>
> Aleksey Shipilev has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
> 
>   Rework for artifacts

Overall this looks very nice; thanks! I left a few qestions, just.

.github/actions/get-jtreg/action.yml line 59:

> 57:     - name: 'Build JTReg'
> 58:       run: |
> 59:         # If runner architecture is x64 set JAVA_HOME_17_X64 otherwise set to JAVA_HOME_17_arm64

This logic seems missing in your new script? Is it not needed? The new script seems to have X64 hardcoded; it looks wrong compared to this.

.github/workflows/main.yml line 80:

> 78:         with:
> 79:           sparse-checkout: |
> 80:             .github

I'm guessing this does not add much extra time?

-------------

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/21692#issuecomment-2441620481
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/21692#discussion_r1819072591
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/21692#discussion_r1819073708