RFR 8224137: Analyze and port invocation tests to jtreg and co-locate to jdk repo

[Roger Riggs]

Hi,

The output limit in jtreg can be overridden using:

'-Djavatest.maxOutputSize=1000000000'

Using -J or -javavmoption, etc.

Roger


On 6/18/19 9:34 AM, Harold Seigel wrote:
> Hi Lois,
>
> Thanks for the review!
>
> >> Is there a way, via a command line option maybe, to see the full 
> (success & failure) results?
>
> Currently, no.  But, even if there was a way, JTReg would end up 
> truncating most of the output.  Currently, the only way to get full 
> output is to run the original tests outside of JTReg.
>
> Thanks, Harold
>
> On 6/18/2019 8:52 AM, Lois Foltan wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 6/17/2019 2:57 PM, Harold Seigel wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Please review this JDK-14 change to move the invocation tests 
>>> written by Vladimir Ivanov into the JDK repo and make them runnable 
>>> using JTReg.
>>>
>>> This webrev adds three tests, invokeinterfaceTests.java, 
>>> invokespecialTests.java, and invokevirtualTests.java.  Each tests 
>>> run its set of sub-tests twice, once using class file version 51 and 
>>> once using the current class file version.
>>
>> Hi Harold,
>>
>> This looks great.  I agree with your approach of initially getting 
>> these valuable tests working in jtreg and then address improvements 
>> via future RFEs.
>>
>>>
>>> Open Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~hseigel/bug_8224137/webrev/
>>>
>>> JBS Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8224137
>>>
>>> The tests were tested on Linux-x64, Solaris, Windows, and Mac OS X.
>>>
>>> The original tests can be found attached to JDK-8163974 
>>> <https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8163974>. Besides the 
>>> changes needed for JTReg and adding copyrights, I made the following 
>>> additional changes.
>>>
>>> 1. The tests now use the JDK's asm support instead of providing its own
>>>    asm libraries.
>>> 2. Only sub-test failures are written to the .jtr files. Writing all
>>>    sub-test results caused JTReg to truncate the output.
>>
>> Just curious.  Is there a way, via a command line option maybe, to 
>> see the full (success & failure) results?  I could see where maybe 
>> this would be valuable when investigating possible future invocation 
>> changes.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Lois
>>
>>> 3. Changed src/invokeinterface/Checker.java to skip private methods
>>>    when looking for an overloading method.
>>>
>>> The tests contain "TODO" comments and other thing needing clean-up.  
>>> These will be addressed in a future RFE.
>>>
>>> I put the tests into hs-tier3 because the invokeInterfaceTests.java 
>>> test can run for up to 10 minutes (on Mac).  The other two tests 
>>> take only 1-2 minutes.  Is there a better tier for these tests?
>>>
>>> Thanks, Harold
>>>
>>