RFR: 8372248: GTest istream.coverage depends on istream.basic [v3]

[Axel Boldt-Christmas]

On Mon, 12 Jan 2026 13:12:42 GMT, Axel Boldt-Christmas <aboldtch at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> These two GTests have a strong dependency that `istream.coverage` is ran after `istream.basic`. This goes against the intended design of GTests. (They should be independent).
>> 
>> As such I propose we merge this into one test.
>> 
>> I kept the two `VERBOSE` variables separate. However I am not sure I understand their purpose.
>> Currently changing `VERBOSE_TEST` to `true` will cause the test to fail, (not all cases are covered). And the value have of `VERBOSE_COVERAGE` has no effect. What is observed:
>>  * `(VERBOSE_TEST: false, VERBOSE_COVERAGE: false) -> Success`
>>  * `(VERBOSE_TEST: false, VERBOSE_COVERAGE:  true) -> Success`
>>  * `(VERBOSE_TEST:  true, VERBOSE_COVERAGE: false) -> Failure`
>>  * `(VERBOSE_TEST:  true, VERBOSE_COVERAGE:  true) -> Failure`
>> 
>> But I kept the original behaviour, just merged into one test case rather than two.
>
> Axel Boldt-Christmas has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains three commits:
> 
>  - Merge branch 'JDK-8372241' into JDK-8372248
>  - Merge branch 'JDK-8372241' into JDK-8372248
>  - gtest istream.coverage depends on istream.basic

> Why is this PR dependent on #28409. If
> the change to CheckGtestDependencies.java was removed, this PR could go in
> immediately. (And then update #28409
> accordingly.)

Purely to have a regression test with the fix. In hindsight it might not have been worth delaying the fix just to have a regression test. 

I do not think there is a way to retarget a dependent pull request other than closing and reopening a new one. If #28409 is not making in the near future I will do so.

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

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/28418#issuecomment-3742340809