Open code review for 8061999 Enhance VM option parsing to allow options to be specified

[Dmitry Dmitriev]

Hello David,

I mean that we can define "-Dmy.property=value" inside VM Option file.

Thanks,
Dmitry

On 25.06.2015 8:01, David Holmes wrote:
> On 25/06/2015 4:10 AM, Dmitry Dmitriev wrote:
>> Hello Dan,
>> I just want to add following: new VM Options file feature allow to
>> define property inside option file.
>
> What do you mean by that?
>
> David
>
>> Thanks,
>> Dmitry
>>
>> On 24.06.2015 19:19, Daniel D. Daugherty wrote:
>>> On 6/23/15 10:43 PM, John Rose wrote:
>>>> On Jun 23, 2015, at 7:50 PM, David Holmes <david.holmes at oracle.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> On 24/06/2015 3:43 AM, Ron Durbin wrote:
>>>>>> David,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The '-XX:Flags' option was considered during the research phase
>>>>>> of this project and was rejected because of its limitations. The
>>>>>> '-XX:Flags' option only works for boolean flag options and it
>>>>>> uses a different syntax for the options than the command line.
>>>>>> For example, '-XX:+UseSerialGC' would be specified as '+UseSerialGC'
>>>>>> in the '-XX:Flags' option file.
>>>>> I'm a little surprised the Flags option wasn't extended to cover
>>>>> these additional requirements. But presumably it should now be
>>>>> deprecated as we (again presumably) don't want to have two
>>>>> mechanisms for doing this.
>>>> I thought the Flags option used to handle any command line options,
>>>> and like David I'm surprised the right answer is to get rid of it and
>>>> make a new option that does what I think the Flags option should be
>>>> doing.
>>>>
>>>> — John
>>>
>>> Greetings,
>>>
>>> Ron is out of the office until next week so I'll provide a little
>>> bit of background...
>>>
>>> Ron has a detailed write-up documenting all the research that he
>>> did on the various command line option mechanisms. We had planned
>>> to attach that write-up to the bug report, but we dropped the ball
>>> (Sorry Mary!) After Ron returns, we'll make a final editing pass
>>> on the document and attach it to the bug report.
>>>
>>> I fleshed out the '-XX:Flags' test cases that Ron posted earlier
>>> in the thread:
>>>
>>> $ more flags.input.*::::::::::::::
>>> flags.input.boolean
>>> ::::::::::::::
>>> +UseSerialGC
>>> ::::::::::::::
>>> flags.input.ccstr
>>> ::::::::::::::
>>> ErrorFile=my_error_file
>>> ::::::::::::::
>>> flags.input.uintx
>>> ::::::::::::::
>>> MinRAMFraction=8
>>>
>>> $ java -XX:+PrintVMOptions -XX:Flags=flags.input.boolean -version
>>> VM option '+UseSerialGC'
>>> VM option '+PrintVMOptions'
>>> VM option 'Flags=flags.input.boolean'
>>> java version "1.9.0-ea"
>>> Java(TM) SE Runtime Environment (build 1.9.0-ea-b69)
>>> Java HotSpot(TM) 64-Bit Server VM (build 1.9.0-ea-b69, mixed mode)
>>>
>>> $ java -XX:+PrintVMOptions -XX:Flags=flags.input.ccstr -version
>>> VM option 'ErrorFile=my_error_file'
>>> VM option '+PrintVMOptions'
>>> VM option 'Flags=flags.input.ccstr'
>>> java version "1.9.0-ea"
>>> Java(TM) SE Runtime Environment (build 1.9.0-ea-b69)
>>> Java HotSpot(TM) 64-Bit Server VM (build 1.9.0-ea-b69, mixed mode)
>>>
>>> $ java -XX:+PrintVMOptions -XX:Flags=flags.input.uintx -version
>>> VM option 'MinRAMFraction=8'
>>> VM option '+PrintVMOptions'
>>> VM option 'Flags=flags.input.uintx'
>>> java version "1.9.0-ea"
>>> Java(TM) SE Runtime Environment (build 1.9.0-ea-b69)
>>> Java HotSpot(TM) 64-Bit Server VM (build 1.9.0-ea-b69, mixed mode)
>>>
>>>
>>> It looks like the '-XX:Flags' option does work for 'bool', 'uintx'
>>> and 'ccstr' options. Clearly Ron and I didn't remember the exact
>>> reason that he ruled out using the '-XX:Flags' option. This part
>>> of the review thread will have to be resolved after Ron returns.
>>>
>>> Dan
>>