RFR: 8026047: [TESTBUG] add regression test for DisableExplicitGC flag

[Michail Chernov]

Hi Bengt,

I've rewritten test using JMX. I don't see here any reason to use gc log 
for testing this flag.

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~eistepan/~mchernov/8026047/webrev.02/

It seems better solution because it doesn't depend on used GC or log 
message format.

Tested locally with JDK 9 b51 using several GC. Tested using Aurora on 
all platforms.

Thanks,
Michail

On 12.02.2015 17:07, Bengt Rutisson wrote:
>
> Hi Michail,
>
> On 11/02/15 16:33, Michail Chernov wrote:
>> Hi Bengt,
>>
>> Test works with all options passed to jtreg during testing ( see line 
>> 97         vmOpts.addAll(0, Utils.getVmOptions());). Doesn't need to 
>> check all GC's, it will be done during nightly.
>
> Ah. I see that now.
>
>>
>> 44     public final static String[] PARALLEL_GC_OPTIONS = 
>> {"UseParallelGC", "UseParallelOldGC"};
>> Here is defined special options. If define one of these options - 
>> will be used other pattern to match output.
>
> Right.
>
>>
>> But it seems to me a little bit wrong. I've checked output of GC log 
>> with different GCs and ExplicitGCInvokesConcurrent. Message "Full GC 
>> (System.gc())" does not appear only in case of using G1 or CMS with 
>> ExplicitGCInvokesConcurrent=true. Will fix it.
>
> OK.
>
> My main point was that I think the whole structure of the test is 
> different than how we usually write tests that verify the log output. 
> I would prefer if the tests look similar. Would you mind re-writing 
> the test to look like the other tests.
>
> I much prefer that you explicitly start with the GCs you want to test 
> than that you use the WhiteBox API to find out which GC you are running.
>
> I'm having a similar discussion with Dima who recently invented yet 
> another way to parse the GC log output from tests. I think it gets 
> very hard to read the tests when they do the same thing in different 
> ways.
>
> Thanks,
> Bengt
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Michail
>> On 11.02.2015 16:15, Bengt Rutisson wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Michail,
>>>
>>> On 11/02/15 13:55, Michail Chernov wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> Still hoping for review!
>>>
>>> Sorry for being so late in looking at this.
>>>
>>> A couple of questions:
>>>
>>> Why does the test only test the parallel GC? DisableExplicitGC is 
>>> valid for all GCs.
>>>
>>> What do you think about writing this test similar to other tests 
>>> that validate the output from the GC logging? Here's an example:
>>>
>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-gc/hotspot/file/566574421b40/test/gc/g1/TestGCLogMessages.java 
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Bengt
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Michail
>>>>
>>>> On 05.02.2015 21:05, Michail Chernov wrote:
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> Still waiting for reviews!
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Michail
>>>>>
>>>>> On 03.02.2015 20:12, Michail Chernov wrote:
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Can someone take a look on these changes, please?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> Michail
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 30.01.2015 18:33, Michail Chernov wrote:
>>>>>>> Hi Leonid,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Issues were fixed:
>>>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~eistepan/~mchernov/8026047/webrev.01/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Now all testcases are executed  from the same VM.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>> Michail
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 28.01.2015 18:28, Leonid Mesnik wrote:
>>>>>>>> Hi
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Why is it needed to start VM twice for each test. It is very 
>>>>>>>> expensive especially for low-end devices.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Is it possible to have driver which starts VM several times 
>>>>>>>> with different combinations of options and check it output/exit 
>>>>>>>> code etc? Also it would be much easier to read such test.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Leonid
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 27.01.2015 18:35, Michail Chernov wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Please review the fix with new test for DisableExplicitGC VM 
>>>>>>>>> flag.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Webrev: 
>>>>>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~eistepan/~mchernov/8026047/webrev.00/
>>>>>>>>> Enhancement: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8026047
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> There is one scenario with 6 parameters combinations.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 1,2,3 scenarios test default value for DisableExplicitGC, 
>>>>>>>>> DisableExplicitGC=true and DisableExplicitGC=false
>>>>>>>>> 4,5,6 scenarios check how VM works when VM changes 
>>>>>>>>> DisableExplicitGC flag using WhiteBox.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Test tries to call System.gc() and check that VM puts message 
>>>>>>>>> to stdout. After (in case of 4,5,6 scenarios) test tries to 
>>>>>>>>> change DisableExplicitGC value and calls System.gc() twice.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Test was executed locally on linux-i586 with all available GC 
>>>>>>>>> and several GC-related flags. Also it was executed using 
>>>>>>>>> Aurora on other platforms.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>> Michail
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
>