RFR (S): 8026043: add regression test for JDK-8000831

[Filipp Zhinkin]

Hi Erik,

thank you for watching at it!

On 10/18/2013 06:59 PM, Erik Helin wrote:
> Hi Filipp,
>
> thanks for adding new tests, really appreciate it!
>
> I have a couple of comments/questions about this test:
> - Do you really need a @build tag?
No, I don't.
> - Could you please provide a comment above each regex with an example
>    that shows what the regex matches?
Yes, sure.
> - This test will only run with the default GC (since no GC is
>    specified). What do you think about additional run targets testing
>    various GC combinations?
The idea was to pass all VM options including different GC's via 
test.java.opts property.
It makes test more flexible and allow us to test not only some fixed 
subset of GC combinations.
> - Have you tried running the test with -Xcomp? The reason I'm asking is
>    because I'm afraid that the compiler might be able to realize that the
>    GarbageProducer main method isn't doing anything.
Yes, I've tried and that object allocation was not optimized out,
but I agree with you, "garbage" should be static.
>
>    One thing that usually solves this is having garbage as a public
>    static variable in the class.
> - Are you using GarbageProducer since you want to trigger young GCs? If
>    so, why only tests young GCs? Would the test works just as well using
>    System.gc() to tests full GCs?
In fact, test running with MaxHeapSize=5m, so both minor and full GC 
happens.
But there is another issue then  - I forgot to set up other heap sizing 
options,
so test will fail when someone start if with, for example, -Xms10m.

I'll fix that.

Thanks,
Filipp.
> Thanks,
> Erik
>
> On 2013-10-14, Filipp Zhinkin wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I've refactored options parsing, here is updated webrev:
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~kshefov/8026043/webrev.01/
>>
>> Note that I'm using ProcessTools.createVerboseJavaProcessBuilder
>> from 8026047
>> to make sure that VM output will not be suppressed or redirected to file.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Filipp.
>>
>> On 10/11/2013 08:22 PM, Tao Mao wrote:
>>> Ok, thank you for heads-up. Then, I'll await your webrev update.
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>> Tao
>>>
>>> On 10/11/13 9:11 AM, Filipp Zhinkin wrote:
>>>> Hi Tao,
>>>>
>>>> Sorry for typo. You're right, the correct one is
>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~kshefov/8026043/webrev.00/.
>>>>
>>>> And I'll refactor it in the same way as fix for 8026047.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Filipp.
>>>>
>>>> On 10/11/2013 08:11 PM, Tao Mao wrote:
>>>>> Hi Filipp,
>>>>>
>>>>> FYI, it has a wrong webrev. I guess it should be
>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~kshefov/8026043/webrev.00/
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>> Tao
>>>>>
>>>>> On 10/8/13 8:34 AM, Filipp Zhinkin wrote:
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I would like to get couple review on test, that cover issue
>>>>>> fixed by 8000831 - Heap verification output
>>>>>> incorrect/incomplete.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Test verifies that options VerifyBeforeGC and
>>>>>> VerifyAfterGCemit appropriate output if they are turned on
>>>>>> and never
>>>>>> emit corrupted output as it was before 8000831 fixed.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Bug ID:  https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8026043
>>>>>> Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~kshefov/8026047/webrev.00/
>>>>>> Testing: manual on local host, automated on various platforms.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> Filipp.