Request for review: 8010518 Move deprecating CMSIncrementalMode from Arguments::check_deprecated_gcs() to Arguments::check_deprecated_gc_flags()

[Tao Mao]

Hi Bengt,

On 3/27/2013 11:31 PM, Bengt Rutisson wrote:
>
> Hi Tao,
>
> On 3/27/13 11:45 PM, Tao Mao wrote:
>> Please see inline.
>> Tao
>>
>> On 3/25/13 9:56 PM, Bengt Rutisson wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Tao,
>>>
>>> Thanks for updating the tests. Looks good to me.
>>>
>>> Have you tried running the tests? It is a very small change so it 
>>> should be ok. But our testing process is very strange and it may be 
>>> that these tests are not run until PIT testing, so running them once 
>>> before pushing is a good idea to avoid unnecessary issues later on.
>> They have passed the jtreg tests. I'm going to push it.
>>
>> script:
>> jtreg -jdk:/Users/tamao/home/jdk1.8.0_b74_macosx/ \
>> -vmoption:-tamao \
>> ./src/8010518MoveDeprecatingCMSIncrementalMode/test/gc/startup_warnings/TestCMSIncrementalMode.java 
>> \
>> ./src/8010518MoveDeprecatingCMSIncrementalMode/test/gc/startup_warnings/TestIncGC.java
>>
>> results:
>> Test results: passed: 2
>> Report written to /Users/tamao/Dropbox/Oracle/JTreport/html/report.html
>> Results written to /Users/tamao/Dropbox/Oracle/JTwork
>
> Great! Thanks!
>
>>>
>>> Also, I see that you decided not to remove "likely" from the other 
>>> messages in Arguments::check_deprecated_gcs(). Would you like to do 
>>> that as a separate change or do you think we should leave those 
>>> messages unchanged?
>> So what was the decision for deprecating these gc's? To me, there 
>> hasn't seemed to be any definitive decision, yet.
>
> It is the same decision as for CMSIncrementalMode, where you removed 
> the "likely".
>
> Bengt
Where is the latest update regarding this issue? Any mail thread, or web?

Thank you.
Tao

>
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Bengt
>>>
>>> On 3/25/13 7:48 PM, Tao Mao wrote:
>>>> Thank you for pointing it out, Bengt. A new webrev is updated.
>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~tamao/8010518/webrev.02/
>>>>
>>>> Please see inline.
>>>> Tao
>>>>
>>>> On 3/24/13 1:16 PM, Bengt Rutisson wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Tao,
>>>>>
>>>>> On 3/23/13 4:51 AM, Tao Mao wrote:
>>>>>> Thank you for review and suggestion. A new webrev is updated.
>>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~tamao/8010518/webrev.01/
>>>>>
>>>>> I like Jon's suggestion about removing the word "likely" but that 
>>>>> means that you need to update these tests:
>>>>>
>>>>> test/gc/startup_warnings/TestCMSIncrementalMode.java
>>>>> test/gc/startup_warnings/TestIncGC.java
>>>> Test files modified.
>>>>>
>>>>> Also, would it make sense to remove the word "likely" from the 
>>>>> warning messages in Arguments::check_deprecated_gcs() too? In that 
>>>>> case you need to update these tests as well:
>>>>>
>>>>> test/gc/startup_warnings/TestDefNewCMS.java
>>>>> test/gc/startup_warnings/TestParNewSerialOld.java
>>>> Have we made a decision to certainly remove these gc comb's in 
>>>> future? If so, it's OK to state so. Anyway, it would be better to 
>>>> resolve it with a separate CR.
>>>>>
>>>>> Bengt
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Tao
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 3/22/13 1:56 PM, Jon Masamitsu wrote:
>>>>>>> Tao,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Changes look fine.  I would remove the "likely" so that messages 
>>>>>>> read like
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "and will be removed in a future release"
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Fewer words are better and the intent is still clear.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Jon
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 3/21/2013 4:23 PM, Tao Mao wrote:
>>>>>>>> A simple changeset. Need a reviewer!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 8010518 Move deprecating CMSIncrementalMode from 
>>>>>>>> Arguments::check_deprecated_gcs() to 
>>>>>>>> Arguments::check_deprecated_gc_flags()
>>>>>>>> https://jbs.oracle.com/bugs/browse/JDK-8010518
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> webrev:
>>>>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~tamao/8010518/webrev.00/
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> changeset:
>>>>>>>> Cleanup suggested by Bengt.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/hotspot-gc-dev/attachments/20130328/0efd6e9d/attachment.htm>