[9] RFR(S): 8021775: compiler/8009761/Test8009761.java "Failed: init recursive calls: 51. After deopt 50"

[Christian Thalinger]

Presumably:
+         WHITE_BOX.enqueueMethodForCompilation(m3, COMP_LEVEL_FULL_OPTIMIZATION);
+         if(!WHITE_BOX.isMethodCompiled(m3)) {
+             throw new RuntimeException(m3 + " not compiled");
          }
works because we’re using -XX:-BackgroundCompilation, correct?  Maybe add a comment there.  Can we verify via WB API that BackgroundCompilation is off?

I’m happy that using the WB API worked.

On May 15, 2014, at 5:44 AM, Tobias Hartmann <tobias.hartmann at oracle.com> wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> please review the following patch for 8021775.
> 
> Problem
> The compiler test for bug 8009761 checks if the stack size after deoptimization is the same as before by counting the number of possible recursive calls until a StackOverflowException occurs both before and after deoptimization. The test tries to trigger compilation by executing the method multiple times and enforces deoptimization by loading a previously unloaded class. 
> 
> The test fails on multiple platforms.
> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8021775
> 
> Solution
> The test seems to be unstable, as there already occurred several test bugs (see 8010399 and 8012037). Enforcing compilation by executing a method multiple times is indeterministic. We have to make sure that the method is compiled and deoptimized exactly at those points in time where it is needed.
> 
> I reimplemented the test using the Whitebox API to deterministically trigger compilation and deoptimization.
> Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~anoll/8021775/webrev.00/
> 
> Tests
> Executed test on machines where it previously failed (1k runs, no fails).
> 
> Thanks,
> Tobias

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-compiler-dev/attachments/20140515/303dcb8a/attachment.html>