[11] RTM tests fail

Fri Aug 31 07:22:28 UTC 2018

Hi Gustavo, 

I'm fine with having a third property. Your description makes sense.

But the property is true when the compiler does not implement rtm, 
e.g., on solarissparc. Why don't you implement something like
   boolean isRTMCompiler = false
   if (!isGraalEnabled) && (ppc || x86) isRTMCompiler = true

Best regards,
  Goetz.

> -----Original Message-----

> From: Gustavo Romero <gromero at linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> Sent: Donnerstag, 30. August 2018 00:28
> To: Christian Thalinger <cthalinger at twitter.com>; Lindenmaier, Goetz
> <goetz.lindenmaier at sap.com>
> Cc: vladimir.kozlov at oracle.com; hotspot compiler <hotspot-compiler-
> dev at openjdk.java.net>
> Subject: Re: [11] RTM tests fail
> 
> Hi Götz, Christian,
> 
> Cristian, I don't know how easy it's to trigger an ad hoc test on your system to
> test the RTM suite against a Graal JVM, but I'm wondering if you could kindly
> test
> a fix for JDK-8209972:
> 
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~gromero/misc/8209972_GRAAL_dont_run_RTM
> _tests_with_Graal.patch
> 
> 
> Götz, I've tried to fix that in vm.rtm.cpu property but it got cumbersome
> around
> TestUseRTMLockingOptionOnUnsupportedCPU.java. There, vm.rtm.cpu
> would be false
> for Graal JVM and so the test runs and expects some failure message from
> the JVM
> regarding unsupported CPU or OS, however the problem is rather that the
> compiler
> itself doesn't support RTM. I could adapt that test but tweaking it locally
> seems odd to me. Also I think that the other tests (*Unsupported*.java) are
> irrelevant when the selected compiler does not support RTM (please see the
> commit
> message where I try to explain it with other words). What do you think?
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> 
> Best regards,
> Gustavo
> 
> On 08/29/2018 10:52 AM, Gustavo Romero wrote:
> > 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
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>
> >>
> >