RFR: 8213269: convert test/hotspot/jtreg/runtime/memory/RunUnitTestsConcurrently to gtest [v6]

[Mikhailo Seledtsov]

On Wed, 3 Mar 2021 18:36:38 GMT, Igor Ignatyev <iignatyev at openjdk.org> wrote:

>>> Moving these tests out of our source code is a good change. 
>> 
>> Yes I agree. The tests were an eyesore.
>> 
>>> We already have a couple multithreaded tests in gtest, and adding this one isn't going to make the gtests unreliable. For future multithreaded tests, it makes sense to make them jtreg tests so that we can control their execution. So I'd like to see this PR integrated, with suggested changes.
>> 
>> Okay then. I am fine with this change too. I recently learned that tests can be disabled in the source code by preceding them with "DISABLED_". Not as good as ProblemLists, since it requires recompilation, but better than nothing.
>> 
>> ---
>> @mseledts :
>> 
>> Would it be possible to rename the gtests to make them start with "os"? We recently added jtreg tests which run the "os" part of the gtests with various large page options (see https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8257959), and if you name your tests "os" too they get tested automatically with various large page settings. Which would be a nice benefit from making them gtests.
>> 
>> Cheers, Thomas
>
> Hi Thomas,
> 
>> <... >Just wanted to understand the direction you guys plan to go with gtests in the future. If they get more complex and powerful we may need more control, eg the possibility to problemlist tests. <...>
> 
> as you have discovered yourself, gtest already has support for the temporary exclusion of tests. I agree that it inferior to problemlists and I'd like to let you know that there is a plan to make it possible to use a problemlist-like solution to exclude gtests. however, it's not on the top of my to-do list as  **currently** there is no big need for that. should it change I'll reprioritize that work. 
> 
> -- Igor

On question: "Would it be possible to rename the gtests to make them start with "os"? "
OK. I can rename reserve_space_concurrent to os_reserve_space_concurrent and virtual_space_concurrent to os_virtual_space_concurrent, if I do not hear any objections.

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

PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/2436