Request for review: 8006629: NEED_TEST: need test for JDK-8001071

[Gary Collins]

Hi Fillipp,

I'm doing a bulk change for allot of tests.. I sent a webrev out last week listing those.. See 8009152 RFR. 

I'll defer to Coleen for review of your current changeset.

Gary
On Mar 11, 2013, at 7:03 AM, Filipp Zhinkin wrote:

> Gary,
> 
> I suppose that your comment was about jtreg tests in general, but not about my particular test, which does not violate what you're wrote below.
> If it is true, then I would like to ask someone to sponsor this change.
> 
> Thanks,
> Filipp.
> 
> On 03/04/2013 10:16 PM, Gary Collins wrote:
>> All these tests are a big mess.. I have a rather largish changeset to hopefully add.. TESTVMOPTS TESTJAVACOPTS and make sure javac path is used from
>> a COMPILEJAVA path instead of TESTJAVA path.. When running profiles the java under test is only a JRE.. thus no javac or jar,etc.. So, we need
>> to make sure the paths to tools are found and set correctly.. Allot of the runtime tests have native components. In most tests we could change ${BIT_TEST} to ${TESTVMOPTS}
>> but appears that will not work for the most case.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Gary
>> On Mar 4, 2013, at 10:01 AM, Coleen Phillimore wrote:
>> 
>>> 
>>> That's fine then. I was suggesting to investigate it but if it's too complicated, it's not worth doing.
>>> Thanks,
>>> Coleen
>>> 
>>> On 03/04/2013 12:24 PM, Filipp Zhinkin wrote:
>>>> I would like to take my words back. :)
>>>> 
>>>> I want be able to run this test with any VM options passed to JTREG.
>>>> While with .sh script the only one thing I need to do is just pass value of TESTVMOPTS variable to JVM,
>>>> with ProcessBuilder I'll have to correctly parse string with VM options and it seems to be tricky.
>>>> 
>>>> So I think that for one particular test it is unnecessary complexity, but if there is a demand in such functionality
>>>> in "testlibrary" it could be added there.
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Filipp
>>>> 
>>>> On 02/27/2013 03:16 PM, Filipp Zhinkin wrote:
>>>>> Coleen,
>>>>> 
>>>>> thank you for pointing my attention on it.
>>>>> I can't see any reason not to use com/oracle/java/testlibrary and I agree that such implementation will be better.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Filipp.
>>>>> 
>>>>> On 02/26/2013 10:14 PM, Coleen Phillimore wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Filipp,
>>>>>> Some new tests have been added that use process builder rather than a .sh file. Can you use this instead?
>>>>>> Otherwise, test looks good.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Coleen
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On 02/26/2013 12:54 PM, Filipp Zhinkin wrote:
>>>>>>> Vladimir,
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> thank you!
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Filipp.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On 02/26/2013 09:57 PM, Vladimir Kozlov wrote:
>>>>>>>> Looks good.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>> Vladimir
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On 2/25/13 11:57 PM, Filipp Zhinkin wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> I've updated test, so now it works correctly not only with fastdebug and
>>>>>>>>> debug builds, but also with jvmg builds.
>>>>>>>>> Also I've fixed issue with hs_err_pid*.log file detection (previously it
>>>>>>>>> could use hs_err_pid*.mdmp instead of log file on windows).
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~kshefov/8001071/webrev.02/
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>> Filipp.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> On 01/31/2013 09:01 PM, Vladimir Kozlov wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 1/31/13 5:34 AM, Filipp Zhinkin wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Vladimir,
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> thank you. I suppose that to run JPRT I have to be an OpenJDK committer?
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> No, anyone can do test runs (-stree .) without commit.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Vladimir
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>>> Filipp.
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> On 01/31/2013 12:01 AM, Vladimir Kozlov wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Looks good. I would suggest to run it through JPRT to test on all
>>>>>>>>>>>> platforms: -rtests '*-*-*-runtime/8001071'
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>>>> Vladimir
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/30/13 3:17 AM, Filipp Zhinkin wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Here is an updated webrev:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~kshefov/8001071/webrev.01/
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> All code related to BIT_FLAG was removed and BIT_FLAG was replaced by
>>>>>>>>>>>>> TESTVMOPTS.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Filipp.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 01/23/2013 12:59 PM, Filipp Zhinkin wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Vladimir,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> thanks for reply!I'll fix it.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Filipp.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 01/22/2013 11:02 PM, Vladimir Kozlov wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Filipp,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You should never use BIT_FLAG! You should use ${TESTVMOPTS} to test
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> correct VM.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Vladimir
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/21/13 3:19 AM, Filipp Zhinkin wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Would someone review the following regression test please?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Test checks that debug VM will crashed on assert if offset
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> passed to Unsafe's access methods is bigger than object size.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To ensure that it is true, shell script execute Test8001071
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> which tries to get object from huge offset.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Only one Unsafe's method is checked because all other
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> methods uses the same mechanism to get OOP from object
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> using passed offset.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Test passes only if hs_err_pid* file created and it contains
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tested assert. Test will also pass if product VM is tested.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~kshefov/8001071/webrev.00/
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Filipp.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>