<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
Hi Evgeniya,<br>
<br>
The fix looks good to me.<br>
<br>
I noticed the following minor things:<br>
- copyrights need to include the year of last change<br>
- test/gc/defnew/HeapChangeLogging.java - is listed among updated
files, but doesn't contain any changes<br>
- test/gc/g1/TestShrinkAuxiliaryData.java - contain unsed variable
'prohibitedVmOptions'<br>
<br>
Thanks,<br>
Dima<br>
<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 12.11.2014 18:49, Evgeniya Stepanova
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:5463736F.7050109@oracle.com" type="cite">
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
Hi everyone!<br>
<br>
Since the decision was made to change only tests that fail because
of conflict for now (skip "selfish" tests), I post new webrev for
hotspot part of the <a moz-do-not-send="true" id="key-val"
rel="4684019"
href="https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8019361">JDK-8019361</a>:<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Eavstepan/eistepan/8062537/webrev.01/">http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~avstepan/eistepan/8062537/webrev.01/</a><br>
<br>
Thanks,<br>
Evgeniya Stepanova
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 04.11.2014 15:32, Dmitry Fazunenko
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:5458B960.8000305@oracle.com" type="cite">
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
Nice plan! Please feel free to send me any feedback/questions
regarding @requires<br>
<br>
Thanks,<br>
Dima <br>
<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 04.11.2014 11:40, Bengt Rutisson
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:5458910B.2070100@oracle.com" type="cite">
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
Hi Dima,<br>
<br>
Thanks for the answers. I think the currently proposed patch
is a good start. We will have to evolve the @requires tag in
the future, but let's have that discussion separate from
this review. And we can start that discussion later when we
have more experience with the current version of @requires.<br>
<br>
Thanks for doing this!<br>
Bengt<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
On 11/3/14 10:12 PM, Dmitry Fazunenko wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:5457EFA6.7050404@oracle.com" type="cite">
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
Hi Bengt,<br>
<br>
That's great that we have very closed visions! <br>
<br>
The general comment: currently, jtreg doesn't support any
sort of plugins, so you can't provide a VM specific handler
of the @requires or another tag. This is very annoying
limitation and we have to live with it.<br>
<br>
A few more comments inline.<br>
<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 03.11.2014 16:31, Bengt
Rutisson wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:545783A1.3050300@oracle.com"
type="cite">
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
<br>
Hi Dima,<br>
<br>
Answers inline.<br>
<br>
On 10/31/14 1:56 PM, Dmitry Fazunenko wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:545386E1.2050402@oracle.com"
type="cite">
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
Hi Bengt, <br>
<br>
Thanks a lot for your detailed feedback, we appreciate
it very much!<br>
<br>
See comments inline.<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 31.10.2014 1:09, Bengt
Rutisson wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:5452A8F7.8080709@oracle.com"
type="cite">
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
Hi Evgeniya,<br>
<br>
On 10/30/14 3:05 PM, Evgeniya Stepanova wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:545245C5.4050504@oracle.com"
type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html;
charset=UTF-8">
Hi,<br>
<br>
Please review changes for 8062537, the
OpenJDK/hotspot part of the <a
moz-do-not-send="true" id="key-val" rel="4684019"
href="https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8019361">JDK-8019361</a><br>
<br>
bug: <a moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8062537">https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8062537</a><br>
fix: <a moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Eeistepan/8062537/webrev.00/">http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~eistepan/8062537/webrev.00/</a><br>
<br>
Problem: Some tests explicitly set GC and fail when
jtreg set another GC.<br>
Solution: Such tests marked with the jtreg tag
"requires" to skip test if there is a conflict<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
Thanks for fixing this! It is really great that we
finally start sorting this out.<br>
<br>
First a general comment. The @requires tag has been
developed without much cooperation with the GC team.
We did have a lot of feedback when it was first
presented a year ago, but it does not seem like this
feedback was incorporated into the @requires that was
eventually built.<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
We tried to implement as much developer's wishes as
possible. But not everything is possible, sorry for
that.<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
Yes, I'm sure you have done your best. It's just that we
have been requesting this feature for 3 years and I was
expecting us to be able to influence the feature much more
than was the case now.<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
My personal hope: @requires will address ~90% of existing
issues.<br>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:545783A1.3050300@oracle.com"
type="cite"> <br>
<blockquote cite="mid:545386E1.2050402@oracle.com"
type="cite"> <br>
<blockquote cite="mid:5452A8F7.8080709@oracle.com"
type="cite"> <br>
I think this change that gets proposed now is a big
step forward and I won't object to it. But I am pretty
convinced that we will soon run in to the limitations
of the current @requires implementation and we will
have to redo this work.<br>
<br>
Some of the points I don't really like about the
@requires tag are:<br>
<br>
- the "vm.gc" abstraction is more limiting than
helping. It would have been better to just "require"
any command line flag.<br>
</blockquote>
"vm.gc" is an alias to a very popular flag. It's also
possible to use: <br>
vm.opt.UseG1GC == true instead.<br>
<br>
The table with all vars available in jtreg:<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://jre.us.oracle.com/java/re/jtreg/4.1/promoted/latest/binaries/jtreg/doc/jtreg/tag-spec.html#requires_names">http://jre.us.oracle.com/java/re/jtreg/4.1/promoted/latest/binaries/jtreg/doc/jtreg/tag-spec.html#requires_names</a><br>
</blockquote>
<br>
The problem with having this matching built in to JTreg is
that it makes it very hard to change. When we discussed
this a year ago I think we said that JTreg should only
provide a means to test against the command line and a
hook for running some java code in the @requires tag. That
way we could put logic like this in a test library that is
under our control. This would make it easy for us to
change and also enables us to use different logic for
different versions.<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
I would be glad to have own harness...<br>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:545783A1.3050300@oracle.com"
type="cite"> <br>
<blockquote cite="mid:545386E1.2050402@oracle.com"
type="cite"> <br>
<blockquote cite="mid:5452A8F7.8080709@oracle.com"
type="cite"> - the requirement should be per @run tag.
Right now we have to do what you did in this change
and use vm.gc=null even when some tests could actually
have been run when a GC was specified.<br>
</blockquote>
it would be great, but it will unlikely happen in jtreg,
as well as test case support.<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
what do you mean with test case support? Hi Evgeniya,</blockquote>
<br>
Under test case support I mean ability to treat each @run as
a separate test. Now<br>
<br>
@test<br>
@run -XX:g1RegSize=1m MyTest <br>
@run -XX:g1RegSize=2m MyTest<br>
@run -XX:g1RegSize=4m MyTest<br>
class MyTest {<br>
}<br>
<br>
is always a single test. You can't exclude, or re-run a part
of it.<br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:545783A1.3050300@oracle.com"
type="cite"> <br>
<blockquote cite="mid:545386E1.2050402@oracle.com"
type="cite"> <br>
<blockquote cite="mid:5452A8F7.8080709@oracle.com"
type="cite"> - there are many tests that require more
than just a specific GC. Often there are other flags
that can't be changed either for the test to work
properly.<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
yes. conflicting GC is just the most popular problem
caused by conflicting options.<br>
If we address this issue and we are satisfied with
solution, we could move further.<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
Yes, I agree that taking one step at the time is good.
Personally I would have preferred that the first step was
a "just run the command line as specified in the @run tag"
step.<br>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:545386E1.2050402@oracle.com"
type="cite"> <br>
<blockquote cite="mid:5452A8F7.8080709@oracle.com"
type="cite"> <br>
Maybe this is not the right place to discuss the
current implementation of the @requires tag. I just
want to say that I'm not too happy about how the
@requires tag turned out. But assuming we have to use
it the way it is now I guess the proposed changeset
looks good.<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
yes, this thread is about change made by Evgeniya, not
about jtreg :)<br>
And thanks for reviewing it!<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
Agreed. And as I said, I think the patch looks ok. I have
not looked at all tests. But if they now pass with the
combinations that we test with I guess they should be ok.<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
Excellent! Thanks a lot!<br>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:545783A1.3050300@oracle.com"
type="cite"> <br>
<blockquote cite="mid:545386E1.2050402@oracle.com"
type="cite"> <br>
<blockquote cite="mid:5452A8F7.8080709@oracle.com"
type="cite"> <br>
<blockquote cite="mid:545245C5.4050504@oracle.com"
type="cite"> Tested locally with different GC flags
(-XX:+UseG1GC, -XX:+UseParallelGC, -XX:+UseSerialGC,
-XX:+UseConcMarkSweep and without any GC flag).
Tests are being excluded as expected. No tests
failed because of the conflict.<br>
</blockquote>
Have you tested with -Xconcgc too? It's an alias for
-XX:+UseConcMarkSweepGC.<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
'-Xconcgc' is not supported yet. (bug in jtreg, I will
submit)<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
Ok. Thanks.<br>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:545386E1.2050402@oracle.com"
type="cite"> <br>
<blockquote cite="mid:5452A8F7.8080709@oracle.com"
type="cite"> <br>
I think some of the test, like
test/gc/startup_warnings/TestDefNewCMS.java, will fail
if you run with -XX:+UseParNewGC. Others, like
test/gc/startup_warnings/TestParNewCMS.java, will fail
if you run with -XX:-UseParNewGC. Could you test these
two cases too?<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
These two tests ignore vm flags. <br>
Add @requires here is not necessary, but it will allow
not execute the tests when not needed.<br>
So, if we run HS tests with 4 GC, we don't need to run
these tests 4 times, 1 should be enough.<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
Do we really want to use the @requires functionality for
this purpose? It seems like a way of misusing @requires.
If we just want the tests to be run once I think Leonid's
approach with tests lists seems more suitable.<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
No, it's not a purpose of course, it's just side effect :)<br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:545783A1.3050300@oracle.com"
type="cite"> But are you sure that this is the reason for
the @requires in this case? TestDefNewCMS does sound like
a test that is DefNew specific. I don't see a reason to
run it with ParNew. If it doesn't fail today it should
probably be changed so that it does fail if it is run with
the wrong GC.<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
@requires - is not the silver bullet, but it's quite easy
way to solve a lot of issues.<br>
<br>
I hope, @requires will allow to reduce the number of
"selfish" tests, which produce a new java process to ignore
vm flags coming from outside. No @requires, no other
mechanism could 100% protect a test from running with
conflicting options, but this is not the goal.<br>
<br>
If one runs tests with an exotic option, like a new G2
collector, there shouldn't mass failures caused by options
conflicts. But a few failures could be handled manually. <br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:545783A1.3050300@oracle.com"
type="cite"> <br>
<blockquote cite="mid:545386E1.2050402@oracle.com"
type="cite"> <br>
<blockquote cite="mid:5452A8F7.8080709@oracle.com"
type="cite"> Similarly it looks to me like there are
tests that will fail if you run them with
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html;
charset=UTF-8">
-XX:-UseParallelOldGC or -XX:+UseParallelOldGC.<br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote cite="mid:5452A8F7.8080709@oracle.com"
type="cite"> <br>
Just a heads up. These two tests will soon be removed.
I'm about to push a changeset that removes them:<br>
<br>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html;
charset=UTF-8">
test/gc/startup_warnings/TestCMSIncrementalMode.java<br>
test/gc/startup_warnings/TestCMSNoIncrementalMode.java<br>
</blockquote>
okay, thank for letting us know.<br>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:5452A8F7.8080709@oracle.com"
type="cite"> <br>
Is there some way of making sure that all tests are
run at one time or another. With this change there is
a risk that some tests are never run and always
skipped. Will we somehow be tracking what gets skipped
and make sure that all tests are at least run once
with the correct GC so that it is not skipped all the
time?<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
This is a very good question! <br>
jtreg now doesn't report skipped tests, hopefully it
will do soon, after getting fix of:<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/CODETOOLS-7900934">https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/CODETOOLS-7900934</a><br>
<br>
And yes, tracking tests which are not run is important
thing. <br>
@requires - is not the only to exclude test from
execution.<br>
<br>
Other examples:<br>
<br>
/*<br>
*@ignore<br>
*@test<br>
*/<br>
...<br>
<br>
/*@bug 4445555<br>
*@test<br>
*/<br>
...<br>
Such tests will never be run, because jtreg treats as
test only files with @test on the first place...<br>
<br>
So, making sure that tests do not disappear is
important SQE task, we know about that, we're thinking
on solution (may be very actively). But this subject
for another discussion, not within RFR :)<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
Right. Glad to hear that you are actively working on this!<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
I was going to say "not very actively", but never mind, we
know about this problem. With introducing @requires
mechanism it will become more important!<br>
<br>
<br>
Thanks for your comments!<br>
<br>
-- Dima<br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:545783A1.3050300@oracle.com"
type="cite"> <br>
Bengt<br>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:545386E1.2050402@oracle.com"
type="cite"> <br>
Thanks,<br>
Dima<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:5452A8F7.8080709@oracle.com"
type="cite"> <br>
Thanks,<br>
Bengt<br>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:545245C5.4050504@oracle.com"
type="cite"> <br>
Thanks,<br>
Evgeniya Stepanova
<div class="moz-signature"><br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
<div class="moz-signature">-- <br>
<i>Evgeniya Stepanova</i></div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>