Open code changes with closed JBS issue - was : RE: JDK-8029528

Jesper Wilhelmsson jesper.wilhelmsson at oracle.com
Thu Feb 13 13:01:05 UTC 2020 

Hi Matthias.

11 bugs from the list has been opened now. I'm still waiting for feedback on a few more that I hope can be opened and then there's a few that unfortunately can't be opened.

Cheers,
/Jesper

> On 5 Feb 2020, at 08:50, Baesken, Matthias <matthias.baesken at sap.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> Thanks !
> 
> Hopefully you can open up at least a few of those .
> 
> 
> Best regards, Matthias
> 
> 
>> 
>> Hi Matthias.
>> 
>> That was more than one bug :-)   We are investigating these. I'll get back to
>> you.
>> /Jesper
>> 
>>> On 3 Feb 2020, at 13:03, Baesken, Matthias <matthias.baesken at sap.com>
>> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> We have an internal policy saying that any change in the open code should
>>>> have an open JBS issue,
>>> 
>>> Hello  Jesper,  we noticed again quite a few open changes , where
>> unfortunately  the related  bug is closed.
>>> Can you open  up    at least some of   those  bugs  ?
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8208080
>>> 
>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8207334
>>> 
>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8209622
>>> 
>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8163083
>>> 
>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8169718
>>> 
>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8193879
>>> 
>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8214418
>>> 
>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8205360
>>> 
>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8207938
>>> 
>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8223052
>>> 
>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8222548
>>> 
>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8223585
>>> 
>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8219781
>>> 
>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8221967
>>> 
>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8221121
>>> 
>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8213516
>>> 
>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8225182
>>> 
>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8225789
>>> 
>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8223727
>>> 
>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8226653
>>> 
>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8222751
>>> 
>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8191169
>>> 
>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8217997
>>> 
>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8223326
>>> 
>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8233801
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Thanks and best regards, Matthias
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> We have an internal policy saying that any change in the open code should
>>>> have an open JBS issue, so in theory there shouldn't be any reviews for
>>>> closed issues on the open lists. If this is happening (enough to be a
>> problem)
>>>> I'd be happy to take that discussion internally, so please let me know.
>>>> 
>>>> As for closed bug ids in the problemList this is mainly the result of issues
>> that
>>>> was moved from closed problemList to open as part of opening different
>>>> features like JFR, ZGC and others. These bugs should be opened a far as it
>> is
>>>> possible. I think creating a new open bug and close the old one as a
>> duplicate
>>>> is a good solution if the old bug can't be opened.
>>>> 
>>>> /Jesper
>>>> 
>>>>> On 4 Nov 2019, at 10:14, Lindenmaier, Goetz
>>>> <goetz.lindenmaier at sap.com> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>> 
>>>>> If a fix for the closed bug is pushed under the "mirror" bug
>>>>> in first place, no open source developer will ever run into
>>>>> the bug id of the closed bug.  Similar for entries in the
>>>>> ProblemLists.
>>>>> 
>>>>> As reviews are in the open, reviewers could demand to
>>>>> open a "mirror" bug before a change is pushed.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>> Goetz.
>>>>> 
>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>> From: jdk-dev <jdk-dev-bounces at openjdk.java.net> On Behalf Of Ioi
>>>> Lam
>>>>>> Sent: Donnerstag, 31. Oktober 2019 23:24
>>>>>> To: jdk-dev at openjdk.java.net
>>>>>> Subject: Re: JDK-8029528
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> For this to work (smoothly), we would also need a mechanism that
>>>>>> automatically redirects from the closed bug to the new "mirror" bug
>> (for
>>>>>> users that don't have access to closed bugs). Otherwise, you will still
>>>>>> be staring at a "this bug is not accessible" page scratching your head.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>> - Ioi
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On 10/31/19 6:04 AM, Lindenmaier, Goetz wrote:
>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> this could be a general way to deal with bugs you
>>>>>>> can not make public.  Editing the text of the bug
>>>>>>> is not possible as you are saying, but that is not the
>>>>>>> only way to make such a bug public.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Also, us non-Oracle reviewers should watch out that no
>>>>>>> closed bugs are mentioned in the ProblemLists. And
>>>>>>> maybe no closed bugs should be pushed, Oracle could
>>>>>>> always open a "mirror-bug" just describing the problem
>>>>>>> and the fix.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> And no, me personally, I'm not working on this special
>>>>>>> bug currently.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Best regrards,
>>>>>>> Goetz.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>>>> From: jesper.wilhelmsson at oracle.com
>>>> <jesper.wilhelmsson at oracle.com>
>>>>>>>> Sent: Donnerstag, 31. Oktober 2019 13:14
>>>>>>>> To: Lindenmaier, Goetz <goetz.lindenmaier at sap.com>
>>>>>>>> Cc: Severin Gehwolf <sgehwolf at redhat.com>; jdk-dev <jdk-
>>>>>>>> dev at openjdk.java.net>
>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: JDK-8029528
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Is there anything in particular with this bug that motivates the extra
>>>> work,
>>>>>> or
>>>>>>>> do you mean in general for all bugs like this?
>>>>>>>> /Jesper
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> On 31 Oct 2019, at 10:16, Lindenmaier, Goetz
>>>>>> <goetz.lindenmaier at sap.com>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> you could open a new bug with the non-sensitive information.
>>>>>>>>> Add the hidden bug as duplicate and close it.
>>>>>>>>> Then reference the public bug in the exclude list.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>>>>> Goetz.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>>>>>> From: jdk-dev <jdk-dev-bounces at openjdk.java.net> On Behalf
>> Of
>>>>>>>>>> jesper.wilhelmsson at oracle.com
>>>>>>>>>> Sent: Mittwoch, 30. Oktober 2019 19:08
>>>>>>>>>> To: Severin Gehwolf <sgehwolf at redhat.com>
>>>>>>>>>> Cc: jdk-dev <jdk-dev at openjdk.java.net>
>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: JDK-8029528
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> On 30 Oct 2019, at 17:22, Severin Gehwolf
>>>> <sgehwolf at redhat.com>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Is there a good reason why JDK-8029528 isn't visible? It's a bug
>>>>>>>>>>> referenced in ProblemList.txt[1] and I'd like to see some details.
>> If
>>>>>>>>>>> at all possible, could it be made public?
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>>> Severin
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> [1]
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk/jdk/file/2c3cc4b01880/test/hotspot/jtreg/Pr
>>>> ob
>>>>>>>>>> lemList.txt#l43
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> I've said it over and over, year after year, I've written it in our
>>>> process
>>>>>>>>>> documentation, I've communicated it through emails: Never ever
>>>> put any
>>>>>>>>>> confidential information in the description of a bug. Regardless if
>> the
>>>> bug
>>>>>>>>>> concerns a closed feature or internal tests - at some point in the
>>>> future
>>>>>> we
>>>>>>>>>> might want to open the bug. If I've had a dime for every time I
>> was
>>>> right I
>>>>>>>>>> would finally get my first dime.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> The bug was filed in 2013, it's about JFR which at the time was an
>>>> Oracle
>>>>>>>>>> internal feature. As JFR has been open sourced I'd be happy to
>> open
>>>> the
>>>>>> bug,
>>>>>>>>>> but the description of the bug contains confidential information
>> (for
>>>> no
>>>>>>>> good
>>>>>>>>>> reason, as always). There is no point in cleaning up the description
>>>> since
>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>> old
>>>>>>>>>> description will still be available in the history of the bug.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> I'll share the bulk of the details below, let me know if you need
>>>> more.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> JDK-8029528 - compiler/ciReplay/TestSA.sh fails: Error while
>> parsing
>>>> line
>>>>>>>> 1002:
>>>>>>>>>> unknown command
>>>>>>>>>> Type: Bug
>>>>>>>>>> Priority: P5
>>>>>>>>>> Affects: hs25, 8, 9, 10
>>>>>>>>>> Fix version: tbd
>>>>>>>>>> Conponent: hotspot / svc-sgent
>>>>>>>>>> OS: linux (comment below indicate that this is not only linux
>> though)
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Description:
>>>>>>>>>> This test failure was spotted in the 2013.12.03 RT_Baseline nightly
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> JDK: Java(TM) SE Runtime Environment 1.8.0 b118 (1.8.0-ea-
>>>> fastdebug-
>>>>>>>> b118)
>>>>>>>>>> VM: Java HotSpot(TM) 64-Bit Server VM 25.0 b62 (25.0-b62-
>> internal-
>>>>>>>>>> 201312032153.sspitsyn.hotspot-fastdebug)
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> compiler/ciReplay/TestSA.sh
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Tests fails because of the following error:
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Warning: entry was unresolved in the replay data
>>>>>>>>>> Warning: entry was unresolved in the replay data
>>>>>>>>>> Warning: entry was unresolved in the replay data
>>>>>>>>>> Warning: entry was unresolved in the replay data
>>>>>>>>>> Warning: entry was unresolved in the replay data
>>>>>>>>>> Error while parsing line 1002: unknown command
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Error: java.lang.NullPointerException
>>>>>>>>>> Failed on unknown command
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Options: -XX:MaxRAMFraction=8 -XX:+CreateMinidumpOnCrash -
>>>>>>>>>> XX:NativeMemoryTracking=detail -
>>>> XX:ReservedCodeCacheSize=256M
>>>>>>>>>> Hosts: Linux-amd64
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Relates to: JDK-8155219 - [TESTBUG] Rewrite
>>>>>> compiler/ciReplay/TestVM.sh
>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>>>> java
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Comments:
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> ILW=LMH=P5. Not a production feature. Intermittent. No known
>>>>>>>> workaround.
>>>>>>>>>> This test is going to be rewritten in java by JDK-8155219, so,
>> problem
>>>>>> might
>>>>>>>> be
>>>>>>>>>> gone after that.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> after rewriting to java, test(renamed) still fails:
>>>>>>>>>> compiler/ciReplay/TestSAServer.java" Exception
>>>> java.lang.AssertionError:
>>>>>>>>>> CLHSDB wasn't run successfully: Warning! JS Engine can't start,
>> some
>>>>>>>>>> commands will not be available. hsdb> Opening core file, please
>>>> wait...
>>>>>>>>>> javax.script.ScriptException: TypeError: sapkg.runtime.VM.getVM
>> is
>>>> not a
>>>>>>>>>> function in sa.js at line number ... javax.script.ScriptException:
>>>> TypeError:
>>>>>>>>>> sapkg.runtime.VM.getVM is not a function in sa.js at line number
>> ...
>>>>>>>> Exception
>>>>>>>>>> in thread "main" java.lang.InternalError: ciMetadata does not
>> appear
>>>> to
>>>>>> be
>>>>>>>>>> polymorphic at
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>> sun.jvm.hotspot.types.basic.BasicTypeDataBase.findDynamicTypeForAddres
>>>> s(j
>>>>>>>>>> dk.hotspot.agent...-internal/BasicTypeDataBase.java:...) at
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>> sun.jvm.hotspot.runtime.VirtualBaseConstructor.instantiateWrapperFor(jdk.
>>>> ho
>>>>>>>>>> tspot.agent...-internal/VirtualBaseConstructor.java:...) at
>>>>>>>>>> sun.jvm.hotspot.utilities.GrowableArray.at(jdk.hotspot.agent...-
>>>>>>>>>> internal/GrowableArray.java:...) at
>>>>>>>>>> sun.jvm.hotspot.ci.ciEnv.dumpReplayData(jdk.hotspot.agent...-
>>>>>>>>>> internal/ciEnv.java:...) at
>>>>>>>>>> sun.jvm.hotspot.CommandProcessor$5.doit(jdk.hotspot.agent...-
>>>>>>>>>> internal/CommandProcessor.java:...) at
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>> sun.jvm.hotspot.CommandProcessor.executeCommand(jdk.hotspot.agent..
>>>> .-
>>>>>>>>>> internal/CommandProcessor.java:...) at
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>> sun.jvm.hotspot.CommandProcessor.executeCommand(jdk.hotspot.agent..
>>>> .-
>>>>>>>>>> internal/CommandProcessor.java:...) at
>>>>>>>>>> sun.jvm.hotspot.CommandProcessor.run(jdk.hotspot.agent...-
>>>>>>>>>> internal/CommandProcessor.java:...) at
>>>>>>>>>> sun.jvm.hotspot.CLHSDB.run(jdk.hotspot.agent...-
>>>>>> internal/CLHSDB.java:...)
>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>>> sun.jvm.hotspot.CLHSDB.main(jdk.hotspot.agent...-
>>>>>> internal/CLHSDB.java:...)
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Here's the failures of this test that we're seeing in the 2017-08-04
>>>> JDK10-
>>>>>> hs
>>>>>>>>>> nightly:
>>>>>>>>>> MacOS X failure:
>>>>>>>>>> compiler/ciReplay/TestSAServer.java: Exception
>>>> java.lang.InternalError:
>>>>>>>>>> ciMetadata does not appear to be polymorphic
>>>>>>>>>> Win-64 and Win32 failures:
>>>>>>>>>> compiler/ciReplay/TestSAServer.java: Timeout
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> /Jesper
>>>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> * Jesper Wilhelmsson <jesper.wilhelmsson at oracle.com>
>> * 0x769E782A

More information about the jdk-dev mailing list