[9] RFR(S): 8066433: Copy Whitebox testlibrary to top level repository

[Igor Ignatyev]

Tobias,

thanks, push it.

-- 
Igor

On 12/11/2014 02:54 PM, Tobias Hartmann wrote:
> Thanks, Igor.
>
> I updated the copyrights.
>
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~thartmann/8066433/webrev.04/
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~thartmann/8066433_hotspot/webrev.01/
>
> Best,
> Tobias
>
> On 11.12.2014 09:50, Igor Ignatyev wrote:
>> Tobias,
>>
>> /test/lib/Makefile
>>   years in copyright should be updated
>>
>> otherwise LGTM
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Igor
>>
>> On 12/11/2014 11:22 AM, Tobias Hartmann wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> are you fine with these changes? We will do the renaming with a separate change.
>>>
>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~thartmann/8066433/webrev.03/
>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~thartmann/8066433_hotspot/webrev.01/
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Tobias
>>>
>>> On 10.12.2014 11:56, Tobias Hartmann wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 10.12.2014 11:54, Staffan Larsen wrote:
>>>>> I think we agreed to use jdk.test.lib as the package name (one dot more).
>>>>
>>>> Yes, but as Igor suggested we postpone the renaming and first only move it.
>>>>
>>>> I've also sent the wrong link. This is the right one:
>>>>
>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~thartmann/8066433/webrev.03/
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Tobias
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> /Staffan
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 10 dec 2014, at 11:52, Tobias Hartmann <Tobias.Hartmann at oracle.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm fine with postponing the renaming. I'll file a RFE for this after the
>>>>>> change
>>>>>> is in. Here are the new webrevs for moving only:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Top level repo:
>>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~thartmann/8066433/webrev.02/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hotspot repo:
>>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~thartmann/8066433_hotspot/webrev.01/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If there are no objections I would like to push the change soon.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> Tobias
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 09.12.2014 20:04, Stefan Särne wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Make sense.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I am ok with delaying the name change.
>>>>>>> There is a phase two with the bulk of the job to this anyway.
>>>>>>> Dmitry, this is where we can have the repo discussion as well.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I think there is an interesting part here anyway.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>>> Stefan
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Igor Ignatyev skrev 2014-12-09 19:19:
>>>>>>>> Guys,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> changing Whitebox package name will cause failures in the tens tests
>>>>>>>> which and
>>>>>>>> aren't co-located w/ the product.
>>>>>>>> right now, we have jigsaw m2 integrating into group repos, this also can
>>>>>>>> lead
>>>>>>>> to some failures. and I'd like not to have these failures mixed up. so I
>>>>>>>> don't
>>>>>>>> want to have whitebox renamed this and next week.
>>>>>>>> however I do want to have whitebox available in jdk and hotspot repo this
>>>>>>>> week.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> can we move whitebox to top repo now and do renaming later?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 12/09/2014 05:43 PM, Tobias Hartmann wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I just noticed that if we want to access the Whitebox API in the top level
>>>>>>>>> repository we also have to adapt the native lookup code in
>>>>>>>>> src/share/vm/prims/nativeLookup.cpp because it depends on the package name.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I therefore suggest to move the Whitebox API completely and adapt all
>>>>>>>>> tests in
>>>>>>>>> the hotspot repository. Here are the corresponding webrevs:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Top level repo:
>>>>>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~thartmann/8066433/webrev.02/
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hotspot repo:
>>>>>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~thartmann/8066433_hotspot/webrev.00/
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Tested on JPRT.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>> Tobias
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 09.12.2014 11:00, Staffan Larsen wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> +1
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 9 dec 2014, at 10:56, Stefan Sarne <stefan.sarne at oracle.com
>>>>>>>>>>> <mailto:stefan.sarne at oracle.com>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 2014-12-09 10:51, Tobias Hartmann wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> thanks for the feedback.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 08.12.2014 20:46, Staffan Larsen wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 8 dec 2014, at 20:18, mark.reinhold at oracle.com
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <mailto:mark.reinhold at oracle.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2014/12/8 2:19 -0800, stefan.sarne at oracle.com
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <mailto:stefan.sarne at oracle.com>:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This would also be a good place to discuss the structure of the test
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> library.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes.  The various "testlibrary" directories in different repos are, at
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the moment, a bit of a mess and in some cases appear to be redundant.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For the present root-repo proposal:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    - Why is it named test/testlibrary rather than test/lib, which is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>      what's used in the jdk repo?
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Probably because it’s called test/testlibrary in the hotspot repo :-)
>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, do you prefer 'test/lib'?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Now sounds like a good time to align.   :)
>>>>>>>>>>> We can update testlibrary in hotspot to the same as well I think (as a
>>>>>>>>>>> second
>>>>>>>>>>> step).
>>>>>>>>>>> Let's go with test/lib.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    - Why does the white-box library get its own directory?  Shouldn't
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>      all test-library classes have the same package root?
>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1
>>>>>>>>>>>> I agree. I'll remove the whitebox directory.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Sounds good, the same package root is better.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    - The package name "sun.hotspot" is archaic.  We should figure out a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>      proper naming scheme for test-library packages, preferably
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> starting
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>      with "jdk.”.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> So jdk.testlibrary.whitebox.* for these? Or jdk.testlib.whitebox?
>>>>>>>>>>>> Whatever you prefer.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> If we go with test/lib - I think jdk.testlib make sense.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>>>>>>> Stefan
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>>>> Tobias
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Based on the discussion around microbenchmarks, it may make sense to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> break out the test folder to a separate repo if it starts growing.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But again, perhaps this is something we can wait for and handle in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> RFE. The test folder already exists in the top repo.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The jdk/test/lib directory has been around for many years now and only
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> contains 28 files.  It seems unlikely that the root-repo equivalent
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> will
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ever be much larger than that, so a separate repo would be overkill.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> The corresponding directory in hotspot has 56 files and has expanded
>>>>>>>>>>>>> quite a
>>>>>>>>>>>>> bit recently. I expect some growth to continue. Many of these
>>>>>>>>>>>>> overlap with
>>>>>>>>>>>>> the files in the jdk directory, however.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> /Staffan
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>