RFR: 8271471: [IR Framework] Rare occurrence of "<!-- safepoint while printing -->" in PrintIdeal/PrintOptoAssembly can let tests fail [v3]

[Tobias Hartmann]

On Tue, 10 Aug 2021 08:18:06 GMT, Christian Hagedorn <chagedorn at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> A test VM used by the IR framework sometimes prints `` in the middle of emitting a `PrintIdeal` or `PrintOptoAssembly` output which could lead to IR matching failures:
>> https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/489e5fd12a37a45f4f5ea64b05f85c6f99f70811/src/hotspot/share/utilities/ostream.cpp#L918-L927
>> 
>> I thought about just bailing out of IR matching if this string is found after a failure but this issue also affects internal framework tests (I observed one case locally where this happened in the test `TestIRMatching`, letting it fail).
>> 
>> Handling `` makes things more complicated for the IR framework tests. I'm not sure about the value of printing this message in the first place. But if nobody objects, I suggest to either remove it or at least guard it with `Verbose`, for example. I went with the latter solution in this PR.
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Christian
>
> Christian Hagedorn has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
> 
>   Replace RuntimeException by ShouldHaveCaughtException

test/hotspot/jtreg/testlibrary_tests/ir_framework/tests/Utils.java line 31:

> 29: 
> 30: public class Utils {
> 31:     public static void shouldHaveCaughtException() {

Should these methods be renamed to `shouldHaveThrownException`? Because that method could also be used in a context where we don't catch.

test/hotspot/jtreg/testlibrary_tests/ir_framework/tests/Utils.java line 48:

> 46:             throw new ShouldHaveCaughtException();
> 47:         }
> 48:     }

Why don't we simply do:

    for (Scenario s : scenarios) {
        shouldHaveCaughtException(s.getTestVMOutput());
    }

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

PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/4932