RFR(s): 8044673: Create jtreg groups to list GC specific tests

[David Holmes]

On 11/06/2014 3:03 AM, Dmitry Fazunenko wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> thanks for the prompt review.
> Would you mind if the "all_hs_tests" group includes "testlibrary/" and
> "testlibrary_tests/"?

testlibrary/ doesn't contain tests.

David
-----

> The updated webrev:
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev/dfazunenko/8044673/webrev.02/
>
> Thanks,
> Dima
>
> On 10.06.2014 7:39, David Holmes wrote:
>> Thanks Dima this looks okay to me.
>>
>> David
>>
>> On 9/06/2014 7:55 PM, Dmitry Fazunenko wrote:
>>> Hi David,
>>>
>>> This is the updated version:
>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev/dfazunenko/8044673/webrev.01/
>>>
>>> I ran all applicable_* groups with the corresponding GC. No failures
>>> caused by conflicts.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Dima
>>>
>>> On 06.06.2014 9:47, David Holmes wrote:
>>>> On 6/06/2014 3:39 PM, David Holmes wrote:
>>>>> Hi Dmitry,
>>>>>
>>>>> The existing nomenclature uses needs_xxx not requires_xxx, please
>>>>> maintain consistency with what exists.
>>>>
>>>> And yes I'm guilty of naming the groups needs_xxx while in the
>>>> comments I keep saying requires.
>>>>
>>>> David
>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> David
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 5/06/2014 2:11 AM, Dmitry Fazunenko wrote:
>>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This fix introduces new jtreg groups to allow not running tests which
>>>>>> could conflict because of GC.
>>>>>> Please note, this solution is temporary for 2-3 months, unless jtreg
>>>>>> starts support the @requires tag
>>>>>> (CODETOOLS-7900307)
>>>>>> <https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/CODETOOLS-7900307>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The change itself doesn't affect anything, it just allows to run
>>>>>> group
>>>>>> of tests which doesn't require a specific gc.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8044673
>>>>>> Webrev:
>>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev/dfazunenko/8044673/webrev.00/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Testing:
>>>>>> I ran all 4 ":applicable_XXXgc" groups with the corresponding GC and
>>>>>> saw
>>>>>> only known issues not related to the conflict of flags.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> Dima
>>>
>