RFR (S): JDK-8020829: JT_HS: 2 runtime NMT tests fail on platforms if NMT detail is not supported

[David Holmes]

On 21/08/2013 11:47 AM, Chris Plummer wrote:
> On 8/20/13 6:26 PM, David Holmes wrote:
>> Hi Chris,
>>
>> On 21/08/2013 5:33 AM, Chris Plummer wrote:
>>> https://jbs.oracle.com/bugs/browse/JDK-8020829
>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~cjplummer/8020829/webrev-03/
>>>
>>> On some platforms, NMT detail is not supported, and this was causing
>>> some jtreg tests to fail. These tests now query a new WhiteBox API to
>>> see if NMT detail is supported, and now behave properly if it is not
>>> supported.
>>
>> Okay.
>>
>>> I also fixed #ifdef INCLUDE_NMT in whitebox.cpp that should instead be
>>> #if INCLUDE_NMT. The source within the #if is now properly excluded from
>>> minimal VM builds.
>>
>> Okay.
>>
>>> The addition of Platform.isArm() is to support changes in closed source.
>>
>> I hate seeing these kinds of methods. Add a new platform, add a new
>> method - yuck! :(
>>
>> We could just use getOsArch().toLowerCase().startsWith("arm") directly.
>>
>> I'd even prefer to see:
>>
>> boolean isArch(String arch) {
>>   return osArch.toLowerCase().startsWith(arch.toLowerCase());
>> }
>>
>> and similarly for the OS - but that is going beyond this fix :)
> I'm not particularly tied to any specific way of doing this. I can do
> either of the above if you wish. Just let me know your preference.

Drop isArm() please and change the closed usage to 
getOsArch().toLowerCase().startsWith("arm").

I'll file a RFE for Platform :)

Thanks,
David

> Chris
>>
>> Thanks,
>> David
>>
>>> Testing was done using the existing NMT tests, verifying that they now
>>> pass on platforms where NMT detail is not supported, and still pass on
>>> platforms where NMT detail is supported. A jprt job is currently in the
>>> queue to run all NMT jtreg tests on all platforms supported by jprt.
>>>
>>> Thanks!
>>>
>>> Chris Plummer
>