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

[David Holmes]

On 11/06/2014 8:36 PM, Dmitry Fazunenko wrote:
> jdk is defined in some exotic way:
>
> jdk = \
>    :jre \
>    :needs_jdk
>
> where
> jre = \
>    :compact3 \
>    :needs_jre \
>   -:needs_jdk
>
> needs_jdk = <list some tests>
>
> I decided there must have been some reasons to define "jdk" not as
> everything in "test/".

There was. I needed to define groups from the bottom up - starting with 
compact1 and also accounting for the specific VM. But ultimately jdk 
combines everything back together - it just does so in terms of the 
subgroups underneath it.

> Looking at current definition of jdk is hard to say which tests are
> included in that group...
>
> Okay, I will execute the tests with "jdk" and check that the number is
> the same.
>
> I hope that the @requires tag will eliminate all that mess with the groups.

I doubt it. It will just present a differently arranged mess.

David


> Thanks,
> Dima
>
>
>
> On 11.06.2014 14:23, David Holmes wrote:
>> On 11/06/2014 8:06 PM, Igor Ignatyev wrote:
>>> Dima,
>>>
>>> we already have the group which contains all tests -- 'jdk'. is it
>>> possible to use it instead of 'all_hs_tests'?
>>
>> Yes that is true - I'd lost sight of that. In particular I hadn't
>> realized the testlibrary and testlibrary_tests were already in the
>> compact1 group.
>>
>> Group jdk is all tests, so no need for all_hs_tests.
>>
>> David
>>
>>> Igor
>>>
>>> On 06/11/2014 01:47 PM, David Holmes wrote:
>>>> On 11/06/2014 7:25 PM, Dmitry Fazunenko wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On 11.06.2014 13:05, David Holmes wrote:
>>>>>> 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.
>>>>>
>>>>> I thought the same, but there there are 4 ctw tests there... Perhaps,
>>>>> they should be relocated, but it's a different story.
>>>>
>>>> Ugghh! :( Yes they should be relocated. And yes that is a different
>>>> story :)
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> David
>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>   Dima
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 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
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>