[11] RTM tests fail

[Gustavo Romero]

Hi Christian,

A quick question:

What's the way you recommend to run the compiler/rtm tests with Graal JVM?

I'm using something like that but I would like know if there is a better way to
do that. I don't want to run all the tests, only the RTM ones, so I would like
to avoid 'make hostpot-*':

JT_JAVA=/usr/lib/jvm/java-8-openjdk-amd64  /home/gromero/jtreg/bin/jtreg -javaoption:-XX:+UnlockExperimentalVMOptions -javaoption:-XX:+EnableJVMCI -javaoption:-XX:+UseJVMCICompiler -v1 -conc:6 -jdk:./build/linux-x86_64-normal-server-release/jdk/ ./test/hotspot/jtreg/compiler/rtm

Vladimir, thanks for filing JDK-8209972.

Thanks.

Regards,
Gustavo

On 08/24/2018 10:53 AM, Gustavo Romero wrote:
> Hi Goetz,
> 
> On 08/24/2018 04:44 AM, Lindenmaier, Goetz wrote:
>> Hi Gustavo,
>>
>>> If it's possible would that be the best solution in this case?
>> Yes, I think so.  It's the most local place to change this.
>>
>> But maybe VMProps works fine, too. Then this is the better place.
>> I just don't know whether all tests properly check that.
>>
>> In general, I think such information should go into the
>> test suite, not into the testee... kind of strange to adapt a testee
>> so that tests pass.  There should be a single point in the test suite
>> where it is listed which VM configuration supports which features.
>> For a while such things were added to Platform.java, but now
>> there is VMProps ... and there are base classes in the test sub-suites
>> that try to do this ...
>> Some tests then again check for the platform themselves.
>>
>> But basically I thought the CPU feature string is there to
>> report about the actual CPU we are running on, not to
>> tell what the VM exploits of these features.
> 
> Sure, that makes total sense. So much that the CPU feature string is
> determined very early in the JVM creation.
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> Best regards,
> Gustavo
>> Best regards,
>>    Goetz.
>>
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Gustavo Romero <gromero at linux.vnet.ibm.com>
>>> Sent: Dienstag, 21. August 2018 15:04
>>> To: Christian Thalinger <cthalinger at twitter.com>; Lindenmaier, Goetz
>>> <goetz.lindenmaier at sap.com>
>>> Cc: hotspot compiler <hotspot-compiler-dev at openjdk.java.net>
>>> Subject: Re: [11] RTM tests fail
>>>
>>> Hi Christian, Goetz,
>>>
>>> On 08/21/2018 08:02 AM, Christian Thalinger wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On Aug 20, 2018, at 5:44 PM, Christian Thalinger <cthalinger at twitter.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Aug 20, 2018, at 5:02 PM, Lindenmaier, Goetz
>>> <goetz.lindenmaier at sap.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think it would make more sense to add this in VMProps.java when
>>>>>> vm.rtm.cpu is evaluated.
>>>>>> Or to adapt the CPU feature string not to report rtm.  While I think
>>>>>> this is crude, I have seen (and then also done) this before.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Adding !vm.graal.enabled to each test will require changing this
>>>>>> in all tests when, e.g., RTM support is implemented in graal x86, but
>>>>>> not in graal ppc …
>>>>>
>>>>> Good point regarding different architectures.
>>>>
>>>> Anyone want to pick this up? :-)
>>>
>>> Yes, I can, although not promptly. Is it ok to wait a week or so?
>>>
>>> Also it's been quite some time that I don't check the Graal code...
>>>
>>> Goetz, would it be reasonable to handle this at the JVM side? For instance,
>>> would it be possible (and correct) to keep separate RTM feature status for
>>> JVM + Hotspot and for JVM + Graal for each architecture so for a given arch it
>>> would be possible to advertise "rtm" for JVM + Hotspot but not for JVM +
>>> Graal?
>>>
>>> If it's possible would that be the best solution in this case?
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>>
>>>
>>> Bbest regards,
>>> Gustavo
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>> Goetz.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>>> From: Christian Thalinger <cthalinger at twitter.com>
>>>>>>> Sent: Montag, 20. August 2018 14:55
>>>>>>> To: Gustavo Romero <gromero at linux.vnet.ibm.com>
>>>>>>> Cc: Lindenmaier, Goetz <goetz.lindenmaier at sap.com>; hotspot
>>> compiler
>>>>>>> <hotspot-compiler-dev at openjdk.java.net>
>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [11] RTM tests fail
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Quick additional question: Graal does not implement RTM (as far as I
>>> know)
>>>>>>> but the tests are always run and I don’t see a:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> @requires !vm.graal.enabled
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> in the test files.  Should we add that?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Jul 11, 2018, at 4:17 PM, Gustavo Romero
>>>>>>> <gromero at linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi Christian,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 07/11/2018 11:10 AM, Christian Thalinger wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Jun 29, 2018, at 11:23 AM, Gustavo Romero
>>>>>>> <gromero at linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Hi Christian,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 06/29/2018 12:16 PM, Christian Thalinger wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jun 25, 2018, at 5:32 PM, Gustavo Romero
>>>>>>> <gromero at linux.vnet.ibm.com
>>> <mailto:gromero at linux.vnet.ibm.com>>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Christian,
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 06/25/2018 09:54 AM, Christian Thalinger wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jun 25, 2018, at 8:49 AM, Gustavo Romero
>>>>>>> <gromero at linux.vnet.ibm.com
>>> <mailto:gromero at linux.vnet.ibm.com>>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 06/25/2018 09:46 AM, Lindenmaier, Goetz wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Did you check with or without these fixes?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Without, unfortunately.  Are all of the failures fixed now (in
>>> jdk-
>>>>>>> 11+19)?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I don't know, our machines do not have RTM, only our
>>> Power
>>>>>>> ones do.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But I think Gustavo Romero from IBM claimed so.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yup, after the three fixes Goetz mentioned all RTM tests must
>>> pass
>>>>>>> on Intel.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ok, I’ll get back to you…
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, please let me know if all went fine :)
>>>>>>>>>>> I did not forget but we can’t merge in jdk-11+19 because of
>>>>>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8205616
>>>>>>>>>>> We have to wait until jdk-11+20 is tagged.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Sure!
>>>>>>>>> I’m happy to report that all RTM test failures are fixed.  Thanks!
>>>>>>>> Thanks for testing & confirming it. :)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>> Gustavo
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>
>