[11] RTM tests fail

[Gustavo Romero]

Hi Christian,

Thanks a lot for reporting and testing it. I've just sent a RFR to the hostpot-compiler-dev ML.

Best regards,
Gustavo

On 08/31/2018 05:44 AM, Christian Thalinger wrote:
> 
> 
>> On Aug 30, 2018, at 6:51 PM, Christian Thalinger <cthalinger at twitter.com <mailto:cthalinger at twitter.com>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Aug 30, 2018, at 12:27 AM, Gustavo Romero <gromero at linux.vnet.ibm.com <mailto:gromero at linux.vnet.ibm.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>> 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 <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Egromero/misc/8209972_GRAAL_dont_run_RTM_tests_with_Graal.patch>
>>
>> Yes, that’s pretty easy. I’ll do it tomorrow and get back to you.
> 
> Yep, works:
> 
> *01:43:50* Summary: hotspot_compiler
> *01:43:50* TEST STATS: name=hotspot_compiler  run=774  pass=774  fail=0
> 
> 
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 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 <mailto:gromero at linux.vnet.ibm.com>>
>>>>>>> Sent: Dienstag, 21. August 2018 15:04
>>>>>>> To: Christian Thalinger <cthalinger at twitter.com <mailto:cthalinger at twitter.com>>; Lindenmaier, Goetz
>>>>>>> <goetz.lindenmaier at sap.com <mailto:goetz.lindenmaier at sap.com>>
>>>>>>> Cc: hotspot compiler <hotspot-compiler-dev at openjdk.java.net <mailto: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 <mailto:cthalinger at twitter.com>>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Aug 20, 2018, at 5:02 PM, Lindenmaier, Goetz
>>>>>>> <goetz.lindenmaier at sap.com <mailto: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 <mailto:cthalinger at twitter.com>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Sent: Montag, 20. August 2018 14:55
>>>>>>>>>>> To: Gustavo Romero <gromero at linux.vnet.ibm.com <mailto:gromero at linux.vnet.ibm.com>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Cc: Lindenmaier, Goetz <goetz.lindenmaier at sap.com <mailto:goetz.lindenmaier at sap.com>>; hotspot
>>>>>>> compiler
>>>>>>>>>>> <hotspot-compiler-dev at openjdk.java.net <mailto: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 <mailto: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 <mailto: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>
>>>>>>> <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>
>>>>>>> <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
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>
>