From duke at openjdk.org  Mon Aug  7 02:44:36 2023
From: duke at openjdk.org (Kimura Yukihiro)
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2023 02:44:36 GMT
Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8313854: Some tests in serviceability area fail on
 localized Windows platform
Message-ID: <dUmFyqjkNveLh3utuad5hI9fZtIyqfzeU9JbSAtL-oE=.4b3ba932-b3da-4f4b-8bbb-e34615208830@github.com>

I would like to fix this issue 
because the svc jtreg test does not pass on localized Windows platform.
Testing:
  all serviceability area tests (jdk_svc group).

Could anyone review the fix please?

Thanks,
Kimura Yukihiro

-------------

Commit messages:
 - 8313854: Some tests in serviceability area fail on localized Windows platform

Changes: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15172/files
 Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=15172&range=00
  Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8313854
  Stats: 3 lines in 2 files changed: 2 ins; 0 del; 1 mod
  Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15172.diff
  Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/15172/head:pull/15172

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15172

From cjplummer at openjdk.org  Mon Aug  7 21:54:28 2023
From: cjplummer at openjdk.org (Chris Plummer)
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2023 21:54:28 GMT
Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8313854: Some tests in serviceability area fail on
 localized Windows platform
In-Reply-To: <dUmFyqjkNveLh3utuad5hI9fZtIyqfzeU9JbSAtL-oE=.4b3ba932-b3da-4f4b-8bbb-e34615208830@github.com>
References: <dUmFyqjkNveLh3utuad5hI9fZtIyqfzeU9JbSAtL-oE=.4b3ba932-b3da-4f4b-8bbb-e34615208830@github.com>
Message-ID: <M2gNuGsldH22cmvHqSqhauwINmfXT48H5UReE8wmt-4=.c35185c1-fd52-4157-af46-0547bfaf3858@github.com>

On Mon, 7 Aug 2023 02:37:15 GMT, Kimura Yukihiro <duke at openjdk.org> wrote:

> I would like to fix this issue 
> because the svc jtreg test does not pass on localized Windows platform.
> Testing:
>   all serviceability area tests (jdk_svc group).
> 
> Could anyone review the fix please?
> 
> Thanks,
> Kimura Yukihiro

test/jdk/sun/tools/jhsdb/JShellHeapDumpTest.java line 153:

> 151:         long startTime = System.currentTimeMillis();
> 152:         try {
> 153:             ProcessBuilder pb = new ProcessBuilder(JDKToolFinder.getTestJDKTool("jshell"), "-J-Duser.language=en", "-J-Duser.country=US");

I just did a commit that changes this code. You'll need to rework your fix. Also, double check to make sure your changes are still necessary. I think they are, but it would be good to check first.

-------------

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15172#discussion_r1286412769

From duke at openjdk.org  Tue Aug  8 09:58:04 2023
From: duke at openjdk.org (Kimura Yukihiro)
Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2023 09:58:04 GMT
Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8313854: Some tests in serviceability area fail on
 localized Windows platform [v2]
In-Reply-To: <dUmFyqjkNveLh3utuad5hI9fZtIyqfzeU9JbSAtL-oE=.4b3ba932-b3da-4f4b-8bbb-e34615208830@github.com>
References: <dUmFyqjkNveLh3utuad5hI9fZtIyqfzeU9JbSAtL-oE=.4b3ba932-b3da-4f4b-8bbb-e34615208830@github.com>
Message-ID: <lBc-ZUDd1LWwTk8IntATcXY0QvWHtDGroYbTx6TKFFQ=.26a4e914-e0e4-4948-8bed-71dcf0415f75@github.com>

> I would like to fix this issue 
> because the svc jtreg test does not pass on localized Windows platform.
> Testing:
>   all serviceability area tests (jdk_svc group).
> 
> Could anyone review the fix please?
> 
> Thanks,
> Kimura Yukihiro

Kimura Yukihiro has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:

  8313854: Some tests in serviceability area fail on localized Windows platform

-------------

Changes:
  - all: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15172/files
  - new: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15172/files/92f49c8d..bec7070f

Webrevs:
 - full: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=15172&range=01
 - incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=15172&range=00-01

  Stats: 2 lines in 2 files changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 2 mod
  Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15172.diff
  Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/15172/head:pull/15172

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15172

From duke at openjdk.org  Tue Aug  8 09:58:05 2023
From: duke at openjdk.org (Kimura Yukihiro)
Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2023 09:58:05 GMT
Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8313854: Some tests in serviceability area fail on
 localized Windows platform [v2]
In-Reply-To: <M2gNuGsldH22cmvHqSqhauwINmfXT48H5UReE8wmt-4=.c35185c1-fd52-4157-af46-0547bfaf3858@github.com>
References: <dUmFyqjkNveLh3utuad5hI9fZtIyqfzeU9JbSAtL-oE=.4b3ba932-b3da-4f4b-8bbb-e34615208830@github.com>
 <M2gNuGsldH22cmvHqSqhauwINmfXT48H5UReE8wmt-4=.c35185c1-fd52-4157-af46-0547bfaf3858@github.com>
Message-ID: <rWsQRkZE-L6KjJ-Mqc5-TfuaPvaxlolddtwwUarbCsc=.270a0899-7ff0-4adc-8f70-e3f92c588d0a@github.com>

On Mon, 7 Aug 2023 21:51:39 GMT, Chris Plummer <cjplummer at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Kimura Yukihiro has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
>> 
>>   8313854: Some tests in serviceability area fail on localized Windows platform
>
> test/jdk/sun/tools/jhsdb/JShellHeapDumpTest.java line 153:
> 
>> 151:         long startTime = System.currentTimeMillis();
>> 152:         try {
>> 153:             ProcessBuilder pb = new ProcessBuilder(JDKToolFinder.getTestJDKTool("jshell"), "-J-Duser.language=en", "-J-Duser.country=US");
> 
> I just did a commit that changes this code. You'll need to rework your fix. Also, double check to make sure your changes are still necessary. I think they are, but it would be good to check first.

Hello Chris,
Thank you for your review.

I understood that 8290497 has a similar fix, as you said.
JShellHeapDumpTest has not fixed yet.
The test always expects "Welcome to JShell" in English as jshell command message, but jshell prints localized message on the localized Windows platform.

I'm sorry, I didn't understand what rework I should do.
Could you give me advice?

I fixed the copyright year.

Thanks,
Kimura Yukihiro

-------------

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15172#discussion_r1286887238

From duke at openjdk.org  Tue Aug  8 11:30:32 2023
From: duke at openjdk.org (Kimura Yukihiro)
Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2023 11:30:32 GMT
Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8313854: Some tests in serviceability area fail on
 localized Windows platform [v2]
In-Reply-To: <rWsQRkZE-L6KjJ-Mqc5-TfuaPvaxlolddtwwUarbCsc=.270a0899-7ff0-4adc-8f70-e3f92c588d0a@github.com>
References: <dUmFyqjkNveLh3utuad5hI9fZtIyqfzeU9JbSAtL-oE=.4b3ba932-b3da-4f4b-8bbb-e34615208830@github.com>
 <M2gNuGsldH22cmvHqSqhauwINmfXT48H5UReE8wmt-4=.c35185c1-fd52-4157-af46-0547bfaf3858@github.com>
 <rWsQRkZE-L6KjJ-Mqc5-TfuaPvaxlolddtwwUarbCsc=.270a0899-7ff0-4adc-8f70-e3f92c588d0a@github.com>
Message-ID: <ZyjEMfkBtjroZ9P60fFMEr1uQbWyj_KF-W9_ncMtwxc=.799991ca-a5f9-41ec-95a3-c2a5cc6341a2@github.com>

On Tue, 8 Aug 2023 09:52:53 GMT, Kimura Yukihiro <duke at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> test/jdk/sun/tools/jhsdb/JShellHeapDumpTest.java line 153:
>> 
>>> 151:         long startTime = System.currentTimeMillis();
>>> 152:         try {
>>> 153:             ProcessBuilder pb = new ProcessBuilder(JDKToolFinder.getTestJDKTool("jshell"), "-J-Duser.language=en", "-J-Duser.country=US");
>> 
>> I just did a commit that changes this code. You'll need to rework your fix. Also, double check to make sure your changes are still necessary. I think they are, but it would be good to check first.
>
> Hello Chris,
> Thank you for your review.
> 
> I understood that 8290497 has a similar fix, as you said.
> JShellHeapDumpTest has not fixed yet.
> The test always expects "Welcome to JShell" in English as jshell command message, but jshell prints localized message on the localized Windows platform.
> 
> I'm sorry, I didn't understand what rework I should do.
> Could you give me advice?
> 
> I fixed the copyright year.
> 
> Thanks,
> Kimura Yukihiro

Hello Chris,
I realized that my fix conflicted to another fix.

Thanks,
Kimura Yukihiro

-------------

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15172#discussion_r1286983613

From cjplummer at openjdk.org  Tue Aug  8 16:59:30 2023
From: cjplummer at openjdk.org (Chris Plummer)
Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2023 16:59:30 GMT
Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8313854: Some tests in serviceability area fail on
 localized Windows platform [v2]
In-Reply-To: <ZyjEMfkBtjroZ9P60fFMEr1uQbWyj_KF-W9_ncMtwxc=.799991ca-a5f9-41ec-95a3-c2a5cc6341a2@github.com>
References: <dUmFyqjkNveLh3utuad5hI9fZtIyqfzeU9JbSAtL-oE=.4b3ba932-b3da-4f4b-8bbb-e34615208830@github.com>
 <M2gNuGsldH22cmvHqSqhauwINmfXT48H5UReE8wmt-4=.c35185c1-fd52-4157-af46-0547bfaf3858@github.com>
 <rWsQRkZE-L6KjJ-Mqc5-TfuaPvaxlolddtwwUarbCsc=.270a0899-7ff0-4adc-8f70-e3f92c588d0a@github.com>
 <ZyjEMfkBtjroZ9P60fFMEr1uQbWyj_KF-W9_ncMtwxc=.799991ca-a5f9-41ec-95a3-c2a5cc6341a2@github.com>
Message-ID: <YC2mPjWdSE_JvZhfHHgxpu0Q5CB2OU-zLOQ4QR1Ev7E=.b9185a93-1a07-40e9-af0a-ac7a31d4c738@github.com>

On Tue, 8 Aug 2023 11:27:55 GMT, Kimura Yukihiro <duke at openjdk.org> wrote:

> Hello Chris, I realized that my fix conflicted to another fix.

Yes, due to my changes you now have a merge conflict you'll need to resolve, and that will involve reworking your fix.

-------------

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15172#discussion_r1287411647

From duke at openjdk.org  Tue Aug  8 23:04:43 2023
From: duke at openjdk.org (Kimura Yukihiro)
Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2023 23:04:43 GMT
Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8313854: Some tests in serviceability area fail on
 localized Windows platform [v3]
In-Reply-To: <dUmFyqjkNveLh3utuad5hI9fZtIyqfzeU9JbSAtL-oE=.4b3ba932-b3da-4f4b-8bbb-e34615208830@github.com>
References: <dUmFyqjkNveLh3utuad5hI9fZtIyqfzeU9JbSAtL-oE=.4b3ba932-b3da-4f4b-8bbb-e34615208830@github.com>
Message-ID: <zIFx0b70Y3i7x4Hjfy3gUtU8dTKaFWqgHatanuEk68A=.99e8835a-f118-494d-ae72-afa63ffd964c@github.com>

> I would like to fix this issue 
> because the svc jtreg test does not pass on localized Windows platform.
> Testing:
>   all serviceability area tests (jdk_svc group).
> 
> Could anyone review the fix please?
> 
> Thanks,
> Kimura Yukihiro

Kimura Yukihiro has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains three commits:

 - Merge master
 - 8313854: Some tests in serviceability area fail on localized Windows platform
 - 8313854: Some tests in serviceability area fail on localized Windows platform

-------------

Changes: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15172/files
 Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=15172&range=02
  Stats: 5 lines in 2 files changed: 4 ins; 0 del; 1 mod
  Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15172.diff
  Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/15172/head:pull/15172

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15172

From amenkov at openjdk.org  Tue Aug  8 23:15:34 2023
From: amenkov at openjdk.org (Alex Menkov)
Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2023 23:15:34 GMT
Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8313854: Some tests in serviceability area fail on
 localized Windows platform [v3]
In-Reply-To: <zIFx0b70Y3i7x4Hjfy3gUtU8dTKaFWqgHatanuEk68A=.99e8835a-f118-494d-ae72-afa63ffd964c@github.com>
References: <dUmFyqjkNveLh3utuad5hI9fZtIyqfzeU9JbSAtL-oE=.4b3ba932-b3da-4f4b-8bbb-e34615208830@github.com>
 <zIFx0b70Y3i7x4Hjfy3gUtU8dTKaFWqgHatanuEk68A=.99e8835a-f118-494d-ae72-afa63ffd964c@github.com>
Message-ID: <uBedmMR8P7cMwsPMuzCxVO6fKF8m0WShuwWtlbRZ7UA=.136e70a9-62bd-4988-9cd7-05191a42a672@github.com>

On Tue, 8 Aug 2023 23:04:43 GMT, Kimura Yukihiro <duke at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> I would like to fix this issue 
>> because the svc jtreg test does not pass on localized Windows platform.
>> Testing:
>>   all serviceability area tests (jdk_svc group).
>> 
>> Could anyone review the fix please?
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Kimura Yukihiro
>
> Kimura Yukihiro has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains three commits:
> 
>  - Merge master
>  - 8313854: Some tests in serviceability area fail on localized Windows platform
>  - 8313854: Some tests in serviceability area fail on localized Windows platform

Marked as reviewed by amenkov (Reviewer).

-------------

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15172#pullrequestreview-1568453858

From cjplummer at openjdk.org  Tue Aug  8 23:20:32 2023
From: cjplummer at openjdk.org (Chris Plummer)
Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2023 23:20:32 GMT
Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8313854: Some tests in serviceability area fail on
 localized Windows platform [v3]
In-Reply-To: <zIFx0b70Y3i7x4Hjfy3gUtU8dTKaFWqgHatanuEk68A=.99e8835a-f118-494d-ae72-afa63ffd964c@github.com>
References: <dUmFyqjkNveLh3utuad5hI9fZtIyqfzeU9JbSAtL-oE=.4b3ba932-b3da-4f4b-8bbb-e34615208830@github.com>
 <zIFx0b70Y3i7x4Hjfy3gUtU8dTKaFWqgHatanuEk68A=.99e8835a-f118-494d-ae72-afa63ffd964c@github.com>
Message-ID: <mOsWlLBAUPYr6at009Ug8pm-ztwKw-s6djjybEcVcqw=.1249ca9c-aa94-4625-a96d-374e3a6ca464@github.com>

On Tue, 8 Aug 2023 23:04:43 GMT, Kimura Yukihiro <duke at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> I would like to fix this issue 
>> because the svc jtreg test does not pass on localized Windows platform.
>> Testing:
>>   all serviceability area tests (jdk_svc group).
>> 
>> Could anyone review the fix please?
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Kimura Yukihiro
>
> Kimura Yukihiro has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains three commits:
> 
>  - Merge master
>  - 8313854: Some tests in serviceability area fail on localized Windows platform
>  - 8313854: Some tests in serviceability area fail on localized Windows platform

test/jdk/sun/tools/jhsdb/JShellHeapDumpTest.java line 162:

> 160:             ProcessBuilder pb = new ProcessBuilder(launcher.getCommand());
> 161:             pb.command().add("-J-Duser.language=en");
> 162:             pb.command().add("-J-Duser.country=US");

How about a comment:

/* Needed so we can properly parse the "Welcome to JShell" output. */

-------------

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15172#discussion_r1287776326

From duke at openjdk.org  Tue Aug  8 23:43:00 2023
From: duke at openjdk.org (Kimura Yukihiro)
Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2023 23:43:00 GMT
Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8313854: Some tests in serviceability area fail on
 localized Windows platform [v4]
In-Reply-To: <dUmFyqjkNveLh3utuad5hI9fZtIyqfzeU9JbSAtL-oE=.4b3ba932-b3da-4f4b-8bbb-e34615208830@github.com>
References: <dUmFyqjkNveLh3utuad5hI9fZtIyqfzeU9JbSAtL-oE=.4b3ba932-b3da-4f4b-8bbb-e34615208830@github.com>
Message-ID: <kVsZ-wLisfnF4hQHbQ2rUBV9XPcMa4YsAtiqv5hUqV0=.9dc339d6-697f-43fd-8e93-1fa551e81f2e@github.com>

> I would like to fix this issue 
> because the svc jtreg test does not pass on localized Windows platform.
> Testing:
>   all serviceability area tests (jdk_svc group).
> 
> Could anyone review the fix please?
> 
> Thanks,
> Kimura Yukihiro

Kimura Yukihiro has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:

  8313854: Some tests in serviceability area fail on localized Windows platform

-------------

Changes:
  - all: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15172/files
  - new: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15172/files/76c1a0e5..a72da46f

Webrevs:
 - full: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=15172&range=03
 - incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=15172&range=02-03

  Stats: 1 line in 1 file changed: 1 ins; 0 del; 0 mod
  Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15172.diff
  Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/15172/head:pull/15172

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15172

From duke at openjdk.org  Tue Aug  8 23:43:01 2023
From: duke at openjdk.org (Kimura Yukihiro)
Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2023 23:43:01 GMT
Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8313854: Some tests in serviceability area fail on
 localized Windows platform [v3]
In-Reply-To: <mOsWlLBAUPYr6at009Ug8pm-ztwKw-s6djjybEcVcqw=.1249ca9c-aa94-4625-a96d-374e3a6ca464@github.com>
References: <dUmFyqjkNveLh3utuad5hI9fZtIyqfzeU9JbSAtL-oE=.4b3ba932-b3da-4f4b-8bbb-e34615208830@github.com>
 <zIFx0b70Y3i7x4Hjfy3gUtU8dTKaFWqgHatanuEk68A=.99e8835a-f118-494d-ae72-afa63ffd964c@github.com>
 <mOsWlLBAUPYr6at009Ug8pm-ztwKw-s6djjybEcVcqw=.1249ca9c-aa94-4625-a96d-374e3a6ca464@github.com>
Message-ID: <Nu-NpBf_3p-_7DQbyzW8DtSQ1SUnErMl9lUMwxmc99E=.df025abd-1fa3-485e-afdb-56891891a263@github.com>

On Tue, 8 Aug 2023 23:17:27 GMT, Chris Plummer <cjplummer at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Kimura Yukihiro has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains three commits:
>> 
>>  - Merge master
>>  - 8313854: Some tests in serviceability area fail on localized Windows platform
>>  - 8313854: Some tests in serviceability area fail on localized Windows platform
>
> test/jdk/sun/tools/jhsdb/JShellHeapDumpTest.java line 162:
> 
>> 160:             ProcessBuilder pb = new ProcessBuilder(launcher.getCommand());
>> 161:             pb.command().add("-J-Duser.language=en");
>> 162:             pb.command().add("-J-Duser.country=US");
> 
> How about a comment:
> 
> /* Needed so we can properly parse the "Welcome to JShell" output. */

Thank you for your comment.
I added a comment to the code.

Thanks,
Kimura Yukihiro

-------------

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15172#discussion_r1287785421

From cjplummer at openjdk.org  Tue Aug  8 23:55:32 2023
From: cjplummer at openjdk.org (Chris Plummer)
Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2023 23:55:32 GMT
Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8313854: Some tests in serviceability area fail on
 localized Windows platform [v4]
In-Reply-To: <kVsZ-wLisfnF4hQHbQ2rUBV9XPcMa4YsAtiqv5hUqV0=.9dc339d6-697f-43fd-8e93-1fa551e81f2e@github.com>
References: <dUmFyqjkNveLh3utuad5hI9fZtIyqfzeU9JbSAtL-oE=.4b3ba932-b3da-4f4b-8bbb-e34615208830@github.com>
 <kVsZ-wLisfnF4hQHbQ2rUBV9XPcMa4YsAtiqv5hUqV0=.9dc339d6-697f-43fd-8e93-1fa551e81f2e@github.com>
Message-ID: <CsDStx69CxoPtBKKX3Rp1kFMkojPbXCB4ErHQVfDu6c=.699694df-f0e4-45e9-a882-1fdefa53d815@github.com>

On Tue, 8 Aug 2023 23:43:00 GMT, Kimura Yukihiro <duke at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> I would like to fix this issue 
>> because the svc jtreg test does not pass on localized Windows platform.
>> Testing:
>>   all serviceability area tests (jdk_svc group).
>> 
>> Could anyone review the fix please?
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Kimura Yukihiro
>
> Kimura Yukihiro has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
> 
>   8313854: Some tests in serviceability area fail on localized Windows platform

Marked as reviewed by cjplummer (Reviewer).

-------------

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15172#pullrequestreview-1568509227

From duke at openjdk.org  Thu Aug 10 07:33:04 2023
From: duke at openjdk.org (Kimura Yukihiro)
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2023 07:33:04 GMT
Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8313854: Some tests in serviceability area fail on
 localized Windows platform [v4]
In-Reply-To: <kVsZ-wLisfnF4hQHbQ2rUBV9XPcMa4YsAtiqv5hUqV0=.9dc339d6-697f-43fd-8e93-1fa551e81f2e@github.com>
References: <dUmFyqjkNveLh3utuad5hI9fZtIyqfzeU9JbSAtL-oE=.4b3ba932-b3da-4f4b-8bbb-e34615208830@github.com>
 <kVsZ-wLisfnF4hQHbQ2rUBV9XPcMa4YsAtiqv5hUqV0=.9dc339d6-697f-43fd-8e93-1fa551e81f2e@github.com>
Message-ID: <UQOY17sEYPHUsqkiiIw71avowiSQy8giru2N_XGlEi4=.752056f6-62f5-4a4d-9355-6da5cdd1afe1@github.com>

On Tue, 8 Aug 2023 23:43:00 GMT, Kimura Yukihiro <duke at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> I would like to fix this issue 
>> because the svc jtreg test does not pass on localized Windows platform.
>> Testing:
>>   all serviceability area tests (jdk_svc group).
>> 
>> Could anyone review the fix please?
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Kimura Yukihiro
>
> Kimura Yukihiro has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
> 
>   8313854: Some tests in serviceability area fail on localized Windows platform

Can I type "integrate" or should I wait until some  labels are added on JBS?

Thanks,
Kimura Yukihiro

-------------

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15172#issuecomment-1672687812

From cjplummer at openjdk.org  Thu Aug 10 19:24:59 2023
From: cjplummer at openjdk.org (Chris Plummer)
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2023 19:24:59 GMT
Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8313854: Some tests in serviceability area fail on
 localized Windows platform [v4]
In-Reply-To: <UQOY17sEYPHUsqkiiIw71avowiSQy8giru2N_XGlEi4=.752056f6-62f5-4a4d-9355-6da5cdd1afe1@github.com>
References: <dUmFyqjkNveLh3utuad5hI9fZtIyqfzeU9JbSAtL-oE=.4b3ba932-b3da-4f4b-8bbb-e34615208830@github.com>
 <kVsZ-wLisfnF4hQHbQ2rUBV9XPcMa4YsAtiqv5hUqV0=.9dc339d6-697f-43fd-8e93-1fa551e81f2e@github.com>
 <UQOY17sEYPHUsqkiiIw71avowiSQy8giru2N_XGlEi4=.752056f6-62f5-4a4d-9355-6da5cdd1afe1@github.com>
Message-ID: <M1sGXrZc6kWe_Np7xg3DmsXqxubzRHqG3Vlne9s9oFI=.41a9bab4-9328-49f9-b2be-94fafe41cc0d@github.com>

On Thu, 10 Aug 2023 07:17:04 GMT, Kimura Yukihiro <duke at openjdk.org> wrote:

> Can I type "integrate" or should I wait until some labels are added on JBS?

I added the `noreg-self` label, which means it is test bug, and assigned the CR to you. You can integrate now.

-------------

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15172#issuecomment-1673748718

From duke at openjdk.org  Mon Aug 14 18:31:33 2023
From: duke at openjdk.org (Kimura Yukihiro)
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2023 18:31:33 GMT
Subject: jmx-dev Integrated: 8313854: Some tests in serviceability area fail
 on localized Windows platform
In-Reply-To: <dUmFyqjkNveLh3utuad5hI9fZtIyqfzeU9JbSAtL-oE=.4b3ba932-b3da-4f4b-8bbb-e34615208830@github.com>
References: <dUmFyqjkNveLh3utuad5hI9fZtIyqfzeU9JbSAtL-oE=.4b3ba932-b3da-4f4b-8bbb-e34615208830@github.com>
Message-ID: <YBrgFaBO_EMiKuRkfjqyoc3VUQg8HoTyqtdKrbhVs1I=.f8aad34b-3be2-479c-97a5-2b608d99f09f@github.com>

On Mon, 7 Aug 2023 02:37:15 GMT, Kimura Yukihiro <duke at openjdk.org> wrote:

> I would like to fix this issue 
> because the svc jtreg test does not pass on localized Windows platform.
> Testing:
>   all serviceability area tests (jdk_svc group).
> 
> Could anyone review the fix please?
> 
> Thanks,
> Kimura Yukihiro

This pull request has now been integrated.

Changeset: 49b29845
Author:    Kimura Yukihiro <kimura.yukihiro at jp.fujitsu.com>
Committer: Chris Plummer <cjplummer at openjdk.org>
URL:       https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/commit/49b29845f7c516c379dde7aae8b3073808f2118a
Stats:     6 lines in 2 files changed: 5 ins; 0 del; 1 mod

8313854: Some tests in serviceability area fail on localized Windows platform

Reviewed-by: amenkov, cjplummer

-------------

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15172

From prappo at openjdk.org  Tue Aug 22 11:30:25 2023
From: prappo at openjdk.org (Pavel Rappo)
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2023 11:30:25 GMT
Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8314753: Remove support for @beaninfo, @ToDo,
 @since.unbundled, and @Note
In-Reply-To: <ZkpogJm2EDFo__5q8dYGb1dNXcJJk2dlQBHYDufYl3M=.a69b191e-f8d6-421f-a6ce-56b0dd573ab2@github.com>
References: <ZkpogJm2EDFo__5q8dYGb1dNXcJJk2dlQBHYDufYl3M=.a69b191e-f8d6-421f-a6ce-56b0dd573ab2@github.com>
Message-ID: <VxxQyH0btkF79RZa-2swdPpELePMfPuaTPEsU_WsN_Q=.c5b55b9d-3e5d-46f7-b19c-193281234c6c@github.com>

On Tue, 22 Aug 2023 11:09:39 GMT, Pavel Rappo <prappo at openjdk.org> wrote:

> Please review this trivial PR.

CC'ing client-libs-dev because @beaninfo and @Note and jmx-dev because of @since.unbundled, which might've been used for JMX before 2007.

-------------

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15385#issuecomment-1688004264

From prappo at openjdk.org  Tue Aug 22 14:55:18 2023
From: prappo at openjdk.org (Pavel Rappo)
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2023 14:55:18 GMT
Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8314753: Remove support for @beaninfo, @ToDo,
 @since.unbundled, and @Note [v2]
In-Reply-To: <ZkpogJm2EDFo__5q8dYGb1dNXcJJk2dlQBHYDufYl3M=.a69b191e-f8d6-421f-a6ce-56b0dd573ab2@github.com>
References: <ZkpogJm2EDFo__5q8dYGb1dNXcJJk2dlQBHYDufYl3M=.a69b191e-f8d6-421f-a6ce-56b0dd573ab2@github.com>
Message-ID: <C5kGr7qQ_fC9geF37lYc85_0qyKkbcztgM4FEjPkpKo=.3a0540af-5f39-4ac0-a4fb-fda64372c109@github.com>

> Please review this trivial PR.

Pavel Rappo has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains two commits:

 - Merge branch 'master' into 8314753
 - Initial commit

-------------

Changes: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15385/files
 Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=15385&range=01
  Stats: 4 lines in 1 file changed: 0 ins; 4 del; 0 mod
  Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15385.diff
  Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/15385/head:pull/15385

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15385

From rriggs at openjdk.org  Tue Aug 22 15:08:47 2023
From: rriggs at openjdk.org (Roger Riggs)
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2023 15:08:47 GMT
Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8314753: Remove support for @beaninfo, @ToDo,
 @since.unbundled, and @Note [v2]
In-Reply-To: <C5kGr7qQ_fC9geF37lYc85_0qyKkbcztgM4FEjPkpKo=.3a0540af-5f39-4ac0-a4fb-fda64372c109@github.com>
References: <ZkpogJm2EDFo__5q8dYGb1dNXcJJk2dlQBHYDufYl3M=.a69b191e-f8d6-421f-a6ce-56b0dd573ab2@github.com>
 <C5kGr7qQ_fC9geF37lYc85_0qyKkbcztgM4FEjPkpKo=.3a0540af-5f39-4ac0-a4fb-fda64372c109@github.com>
Message-ID: <p2i3ZqGT5RCchLQxbjLRsGLDe2J-sy23oQLTod7MY2Q=.18b6a17f-3f4b-468c-b00a-8ae61679fda4@github.com>

On Tue, 22 Aug 2023 14:55:18 GMT, Pavel Rappo <prappo at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Please review this trivial PR.
>
> Pavel Rappo has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains two commits:
> 
>  - Merge branch 'master' into 8314753
>  - Initial commit

Looks trivial only after reviewing the issue and knowing the background.
The PR description could be a bit more complete and save a bunch of clicking around.

-------------

Marked as reviewed by rriggs (Reviewer).

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15385#pullrequestreview-1589653044

From prappo at openjdk.org  Tue Aug 22 15:23:47 2023
From: prappo at openjdk.org (Pavel Rappo)
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2023 15:23:47 GMT
Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8314753: Remove support for @beaninfo, @ToDo,
 @since.unbundled, and @Note [v2]
In-Reply-To: <C5kGr7qQ_fC9geF37lYc85_0qyKkbcztgM4FEjPkpKo=.3a0540af-5f39-4ac0-a4fb-fda64372c109@github.com>
References: <ZkpogJm2EDFo__5q8dYGb1dNXcJJk2dlQBHYDufYl3M=.a69b191e-f8d6-421f-a6ce-56b0dd573ab2@github.com>
 <C5kGr7qQ_fC9geF37lYc85_0qyKkbcztgM4FEjPkpKo=.3a0540af-5f39-4ac0-a4fb-fda64372c109@github.com>
Message-ID: <DD9h-0WJv6OXdU1rzHCbJ2XghtuiaRLqRdzUvaZOAcc=.3aeb4b23-2613-4362-85ba-655167730b9a@github.com>

On Tue, 22 Aug 2023 14:55:18 GMT, Pavel Rappo <prappo at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Please review this trivial PR.
>
> Pavel Rappo has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains two commits:
> 
>  - Merge branch 'master' into 8314753
>  - Initial commit

Thanks for reviewing it.

> Looks trivial only after reviewing the issue and knowing the background.
> The PR description could be a bit more complete and save a bunch of clicking around.

Fair enough. For the benefit of other reviewers, I'll copy the JBS description here and additionally note that tags in question are absent in the mainline doc comments and are also disabled during `make docs`. JBS:

Those tags seem to have been effectively decommissioned, but their remnants are still there and when seen, raise needless questions. 

- `@beaninfo` seems to relate to UI: 

   - [JDK-7179078](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-7179078) 
   - [JDK-4763438](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-4763438) 
   - [JDK-8051548](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8051548) 

- `@ToDo` and `@since.unbundled` hasn't been used since the initial load (2007). 

- `@Note` seems to relate to UI: 

   - [JDK-8285686](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8285686) 
   - [JDK-8227324](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8227324) 
   - [JDK-8222362](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8222362)

-------------

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15385#issuecomment-1688367797

From azvegint at openjdk.org  Mon Aug 28 14:11:12 2023
From: azvegint at openjdk.org (Alexander Zvegintsev)
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2023 14:11:12 GMT
Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8314753: Remove support for @beaninfo, @ToDo,
 @since.unbundled, and @Note [v2]
In-Reply-To: <C5kGr7qQ_fC9geF37lYc85_0qyKkbcztgM4FEjPkpKo=.3a0540af-5f39-4ac0-a4fb-fda64372c109@github.com>
References: <ZkpogJm2EDFo__5q8dYGb1dNXcJJk2dlQBHYDufYl3M=.a69b191e-f8d6-421f-a6ce-56b0dd573ab2@github.com>
 <C5kGr7qQ_fC9geF37lYc85_0qyKkbcztgM4FEjPkpKo=.3a0540af-5f39-4ac0-a4fb-fda64372c109@github.com>
Message-ID: <eoOaLBXooZ9uqNTM2WcGbiK_Bct3PA2ti-x-Tk3PbQQ=.6a7eea57-cfa1-4850-8473-11d706be4699@github.com>

On Tue, 22 Aug 2023 14:55:18 GMT, Pavel Rappo <prappo at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Please review this trivial PR.
>
> Pavel Rappo has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains two commits:
> 
>  - Merge branch 'master' into 8314753
>  - Initial commit

Marked as reviewed by azvegint (Reviewer).

-------------

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15385#pullrequestreview-1598378564

From lkorinth at openjdk.org  Mon Aug 28 16:01:53 2023
From: lkorinth at openjdk.org (Leo Korinth)
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2023 16:01:53 GMT
Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8315097: Rename createJavaProcessBuilder
Message-ID: <uiRsPN6Y-xlpEwV-mnXYs8JbFseCnxbtGrxfgUAk2XE=.c9be5d27-e11f-401b-9797-c2943e7a83db@github.com>

Rename createJavaProcessBuilder so that it is not used by mistake instead of createTestJvm.

I have used the following sed script: `find -name "*.java" | xargs -n 1 sed -i -e "s/createJavaProcessBuilder(/createJavaProcessBuilderIgnoreTestJavaOpts(/g"`

Then I have manually modified ProcessTools.java. In that file I have moved one version of createJavaProcessBuilder so that it is close to the other version. Then I have added a javadoc comment in bold telling:

   /**
     * Create ProcessBuilder using the java launcher from the jdk to
     * be tested.
     *
     * <p><b> Please observe that you likely should use
     * createTestJvm() instead of this method because createTestJvm()
     * will add JVM options from "test.vm.opts" and "test.java.opts"
     * </b> and this method will not do that.
     *
     * @param command Arguments to pass to the java command.
     * @return The ProcessBuilder instance representing the java command.
     */


I have used the name createJavaProcessBuilderIgnoreTestJavaOpts because of the name of Utils.prependTestJavaOpts that adds those VM flags. If you have a better name I could do a rename of the method. I kind of like that it is long and clumsy, that makes it harder to use...

I have run tier 1 testing, and I have started more exhaustive testing.

-------------

Commit messages:
 - 8315097: Rename createJavaProcessBuilder

Changes: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15452/files
 Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=15452&range=00
  Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8315097
  Stats: 756 lines in 462 files changed: 22 ins; 10 del; 724 mod
  Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15452.diff
  Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/15452/head:pull/15452

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15452

From lmesnik at openjdk.org  Mon Aug 28 19:06:11 2023
From: lmesnik at openjdk.org (Leonid Mesnik)
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2023 19:06:11 GMT
Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8315097: Rename createJavaProcessBuilder
In-Reply-To: <uiRsPN6Y-xlpEwV-mnXYs8JbFseCnxbtGrxfgUAk2XE=.c9be5d27-e11f-401b-9797-c2943e7a83db@github.com>
References: <uiRsPN6Y-xlpEwV-mnXYs8JbFseCnxbtGrxfgUAk2XE=.c9be5d27-e11f-401b-9797-c2943e7a83db@github.com>
Message-ID: <kTqMYPi97NeiCYDUN5NRbc7Z3eUlU8h4KxhgxYmRlTA=.06936fb1-58f7-4779-9814-55872d529630@github.com>

On Mon, 28 Aug 2023 15:54:08 GMT, Leo Korinth <lkorinth at openjdk.org> wrote:

> Rename createJavaProcessBuilder so that it is not used by mistake instead of createTestJvm.
> 
> I have used the following sed script: `find -name "*.java" | xargs -n 1 sed -i -e "s/createJavaProcessBuilder(/createJavaProcessBuilderIgnoreTestJavaOpts(/g"`
> 
> Then I have manually modified ProcessTools.java. In that file I have moved one version of createJavaProcessBuilder so that it is close to the other version. Then I have added a javadoc comment in bold telling:
> 
>    /**
>      * Create ProcessBuilder using the java launcher from the jdk to
>      * be tested.
>      *
>      * <p><b> Please observe that you likely should use
>      * createTestJvm() instead of this method because createTestJvm()
>      * will add JVM options from "test.vm.opts" and "test.java.opts"
>      * </b> and this method will not do that.
>      *
>      * @param command Arguments to pass to the java command.
>      * @return The ProcessBuilder instance representing the java command.
>      */
> 
> 
> I have used the name createJavaProcessBuilderIgnoreTestJavaOpts because of the name of Utils.prependTestJavaOpts that adds those VM flags. If you have a better name I could do a rename of the method. I kind of like that it is long and clumsy, that makes it harder to use...
> 
> I have run tier 1 testing, and I have started more exhaustive testing.

The. changes looks good. Please update copyrights for changed filed.
I expect that you completed execution of all tests to ensure that nothing is broken.

-------------

Marked as reviewed by lmesnik (Reviewer).

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15452#pullrequestreview-1598884378

From dholmes at openjdk.org  Tue Aug 29 05:06:08 2023
From: dholmes at openjdk.org (David Holmes)
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2023 05:06:08 GMT
Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8315097: Rename createJavaProcessBuilder
In-Reply-To: <uiRsPN6Y-xlpEwV-mnXYs8JbFseCnxbtGrxfgUAk2XE=.c9be5d27-e11f-401b-9797-c2943e7a83db@github.com>
References: <uiRsPN6Y-xlpEwV-mnXYs8JbFseCnxbtGrxfgUAk2XE=.c9be5d27-e11f-401b-9797-c2943e7a83db@github.com>
Message-ID: <na05dDa2ZtCK2sfdXwnvzPgInmAMd9J9qUwSGVjhw_Q=.e63bc687-31af-47ac-ac0a-1a874693fff5@github.com>

On Mon, 28 Aug 2023 15:54:08 GMT, Leo Korinth <lkorinth at openjdk.org> wrote:

> Rename createJavaProcessBuilder so that it is not used by mistake instead of createTestJvm.
> 
> I have used the following sed script: `find -name "*.java" | xargs -n 1 sed -i -e "s/createJavaProcessBuilder(/createJavaProcessBuilderIgnoreTestJavaOpts(/g"`
> 
> Then I have manually modified ProcessTools.java. In that file I have moved one version of createJavaProcessBuilder so that it is close to the other version. Then I have added a javadoc comment in bold telling:
> 
>    /**
>      * Create ProcessBuilder using the java launcher from the jdk to
>      * be tested.
>      *
>      * <p><b> Please observe that you likely should use
>      * createTestJvm() instead of this method because createTestJvm()
>      * will add JVM options from "test.vm.opts" and "test.java.opts"
>      * </b> and this method will not do that.
>      *
>      * @param command Arguments to pass to the java command.
>      * @return The ProcessBuilder instance representing the java command.
>      */
> 
> 
> I have used the name createJavaProcessBuilderIgnoreTestJavaOpts because of the name of Utils.prependTestJavaOpts that adds those VM flags. If you have a better name I could do a rename of the method. I kind of like that it is long and clumsy, that makes it harder to use...
> 
> I have run tier 1 testing, and I have started more exhaustive testing.

I think the admonition about using this method is a bit strong in that it is natural to use this plain process builder method when a test is going to set its own specific flags for the exec'd process. But I'm okay with renaming to avoid copy'n'paste errors that accidentally use the wrong version.

Thanks

-------------

Marked as reviewed by dholmes (Reviewer).

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15452#pullrequestreview-1599483514

From kevinw at openjdk.org  Tue Aug 29 08:38:11 2023
From: kevinw at openjdk.org (Kevin Walls)
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2023 08:38:11 GMT
Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8314753: Remove support for @beaninfo, @ToDo,
 @since.unbundled, and @Note [v2]
In-Reply-To: <C5kGr7qQ_fC9geF37lYc85_0qyKkbcztgM4FEjPkpKo=.3a0540af-5f39-4ac0-a4fb-fda64372c109@github.com>
References: <ZkpogJm2EDFo__5q8dYGb1dNXcJJk2dlQBHYDufYl3M=.a69b191e-f8d6-421f-a6ce-56b0dd573ab2@github.com>
 <C5kGr7qQ_fC9geF37lYc85_0qyKkbcztgM4FEjPkpKo=.3a0540af-5f39-4ac0-a4fb-fda64372c109@github.com>
Message-ID: <Zn7adx5B-3hODmkTGQ95D-ELw_EXmduHbtgSvBJmQoc=.a00e7a98-1be5-40ff-b144-8d08aacbe5d1@github.com>

On Tue, 22 Aug 2023 14:55:18 GMT, Pavel Rappo <prappo at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Please review this trivial PR.
>
> Pavel Rappo has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains two commits:
> 
>  - Merge branch 'master' into 8314753
>  - Initial commit

Looks good, thanks.

-------------

Marked as reviewed by kevinw (Committer).

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15385#pullrequestreview-1599820441

From lkorinth at openjdk.org  Tue Aug 29 09:12:51 2023
From: lkorinth at openjdk.org (Leo Korinth)
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2023 09:12:51 GMT
Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8315097: Rename createJavaProcessBuilder [v2]
In-Reply-To: <uiRsPN6Y-xlpEwV-mnXYs8JbFseCnxbtGrxfgUAk2XE=.c9be5d27-e11f-401b-9797-c2943e7a83db@github.com>
References: <uiRsPN6Y-xlpEwV-mnXYs8JbFseCnxbtGrxfgUAk2XE=.c9be5d27-e11f-401b-9797-c2943e7a83db@github.com>
Message-ID: <ISuejqIr1InBH-hXEzgOt7iBXrhH4iv93glC3woOewQ=.3a7357d0-a911-4dfa-834b-2c5123915ce7@github.com>

> Rename createJavaProcessBuilder so that it is not used by mistake instead of createTestJvm.
> 
> I have used the following sed script: `find -name "*.java" | xargs -n 1 sed -i -e "s/createJavaProcessBuilder(/createJavaProcessBuilderIgnoreTestJavaOpts(/g"`
> 
> Then I have manually modified ProcessTools.java. In that file I have moved one version of createJavaProcessBuilder so that it is close to the other version. Then I have added a javadoc comment in bold telling:
> 
>    /**
>      * Create ProcessBuilder using the java launcher from the jdk to
>      * be tested.
>      *
>      * <p><b> Please observe that you likely should use
>      * createTestJvm() instead of this method because createTestJvm()
>      * will add JVM options from "test.vm.opts" and "test.java.opts"
>      * </b> and this method will not do that.
>      *
>      * @param command Arguments to pass to the java command.
>      * @return The ProcessBuilder instance representing the java command.
>      */
> 
> 
> I have used the name createJavaProcessBuilderIgnoreTestJavaOpts because of the name of Utils.prependTestJavaOpts that adds those VM flags. If you have a better name I could do a rename of the method. I kind of like that it is long and clumsy, that makes it harder to use...
> 
> I have run tier 1 testing, and I have started more exhaustive testing.

Leo Korinth has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:

  copyright

-------------

Changes:
  - all: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15452/files
  - new: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15452/files/4b2d1711..f3418c80

Webrevs:
 - full: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=15452&range=01
 - incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=15452&range=00-01

  Stats: 344 lines in 344 files changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 344 mod
  Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15452.diff
  Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/15452/head:pull/15452

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15452

From prappo at openjdk.org  Tue Aug 29 12:03:23 2023
From: prappo at openjdk.org (Pavel Rappo)
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2023 12:03:23 GMT
Subject: jmx-dev Integrated: 8314753: Remove support for @beaninfo, @ToDo,
 @since.unbundled, and @Note
In-Reply-To: <ZkpogJm2EDFo__5q8dYGb1dNXcJJk2dlQBHYDufYl3M=.a69b191e-f8d6-421f-a6ce-56b0dd573ab2@github.com>
References: <ZkpogJm2EDFo__5q8dYGb1dNXcJJk2dlQBHYDufYl3M=.a69b191e-f8d6-421f-a6ce-56b0dd573ab2@github.com>
Message-ID: <Qd_K5bwqb0rkvi99woNSL6V_jtnTiV7JcsbU0FEl8W4=.90a043de-8bac-4296-9600-2e7d604b2c24@github.com>

On Tue, 22 Aug 2023 11:09:39 GMT, Pavel Rappo <prappo at openjdk.org> wrote:

> Please review this trivial PR.

This pull request has now been integrated.

Changeset: a4e97aa4
Author:    Pavel Rappo <prappo at openjdk.org>
URL:       https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/commit/a4e97aa4ebe6fcfc3ed9e45ed81df1d55e52d621
Stats:     4 lines in 1 file changed: 0 ins; 4 del; 0 mod

8314753: Remove support for @beaninfo, @ToDo, @since.unbundled, and @Note

Reviewed-by: rriggs, azvegint, kevinw

-------------

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15385

From rriggs at openjdk.org  Tue Aug 29 14:09:12 2023
From: rriggs at openjdk.org (Roger Riggs)
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2023 14:09:12 GMT
Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8315097: Rename createJavaProcessBuilder [v2]
In-Reply-To: <ISuejqIr1InBH-hXEzgOt7iBXrhH4iv93glC3woOewQ=.3a7357d0-a911-4dfa-834b-2c5123915ce7@github.com>
References: <uiRsPN6Y-xlpEwV-mnXYs8JbFseCnxbtGrxfgUAk2XE=.c9be5d27-e11f-401b-9797-c2943e7a83db@github.com>
 <ISuejqIr1InBH-hXEzgOt7iBXrhH4iv93glC3woOewQ=.3a7357d0-a911-4dfa-834b-2c5123915ce7@github.com>
Message-ID: <pnAnjv8HLt1sykmB9jRamtiVRoTbmwQi9xGuaSnCi10=.34427fd4-7b88-436e-946b-04c7364a1853@github.com>

On Tue, 29 Aug 2023 09:12:51 GMT, Leo Korinth <lkorinth at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Rename createJavaProcessBuilder so that it is not used by mistake instead of createTestJvm.
>> 
>> I have used the following sed script: `find -name "*.java" | xargs -n 1 sed -i -e "s/createJavaProcessBuilder(/createJavaProcessBuilderIgnoreTestJavaOpts(/g"`
>> 
>> Then I have manually modified ProcessTools.java. In that file I have moved one version of createJavaProcessBuilder so that it is close to the other version. Then I have added a javadoc comment in bold telling:
>> 
>>    /**
>>      * Create ProcessBuilder using the java launcher from the jdk to
>>      * be tested.
>>      *
>>      * <p><b> Please observe that you likely should use
>>      * createTestJvm() instead of this method because createTestJvm()
>>      * will add JVM options from "test.vm.opts" and "test.java.opts"
>>      * </b> and this method will not do that.
>>      *
>>      * @param command Arguments to pass to the java command.
>>      * @return The ProcessBuilder instance representing the java command.
>>      */
>> 
>> 
>> I have used the name createJavaProcessBuilderIgnoreTestJavaOpts because of the name of Utils.prependTestJavaOpts that adds those VM flags. If you have a better name I could do a rename of the method. I kind of like that it is long and clumsy, that makes it harder to use...
>> 
>> I have run tier 1 testing, and I have started more exhaustive testing.
>
> Leo Korinth has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
> 
>   copyright

I don't think this is the best change across so many files.
It gives a very ugly name to a common test function and affects a very large number of tests.

-------------

Changes requested by rriggs (Reviewer).

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15452#pullrequestreview-1600512718

From lkorinth at openjdk.org  Tue Aug 29 15:13:11 2023
From: lkorinth at openjdk.org (Leo Korinth)
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2023 15:13:11 GMT
Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8315097: Rename createJavaProcessBuilder [v2]
In-Reply-To: <pnAnjv8HLt1sykmB9jRamtiVRoTbmwQi9xGuaSnCi10=.34427fd4-7b88-436e-946b-04c7364a1853@github.com>
References: <uiRsPN6Y-xlpEwV-mnXYs8JbFseCnxbtGrxfgUAk2XE=.c9be5d27-e11f-401b-9797-c2943e7a83db@github.com>
 <ISuejqIr1InBH-hXEzgOt7iBXrhH4iv93glC3woOewQ=.3a7357d0-a911-4dfa-834b-2c5123915ce7@github.com>
 <pnAnjv8HLt1sykmB9jRamtiVRoTbmwQi9xGuaSnCi10=.34427fd4-7b88-436e-946b-04c7364a1853@github.com>
Message-ID: <HCFLeG3EfMrzIj9IjcMM4NeSOpSu6cC3Nr4Ws85M4lU=.00c1992b-c510-4349-a998-24a06b2b31a5@github.com>

On Tue, 29 Aug 2023 14:06:01 GMT, Roger Riggs <rriggs at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Leo Korinth has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
>> 
>>   copyright
>
> I don't think this is the best change across so many files.
> It gives a very ugly name to a common test function and affects a very large number of tests.

@RogerRiggs If it is only the name you want changed, maybe you can offer a better name?

-------------

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15452#issuecomment-1697634872

From rriggs at openjdk.org  Tue Aug 29 16:48:15 2023
From: rriggs at openjdk.org (Roger Riggs)
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2023 16:48:15 GMT
Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8315097: Rename createJavaProcessBuilder [v2]
In-Reply-To: <pnAnjv8HLt1sykmB9jRamtiVRoTbmwQi9xGuaSnCi10=.34427fd4-7b88-436e-946b-04c7364a1853@github.com>
References: <uiRsPN6Y-xlpEwV-mnXYs8JbFseCnxbtGrxfgUAk2XE=.c9be5d27-e11f-401b-9797-c2943e7a83db@github.com>
 <ISuejqIr1InBH-hXEzgOt7iBXrhH4iv93glC3woOewQ=.3a7357d0-a911-4dfa-834b-2c5123915ce7@github.com>
 <pnAnjv8HLt1sykmB9jRamtiVRoTbmwQi9xGuaSnCi10=.34427fd4-7b88-436e-946b-04c7364a1853@github.com>
Message-ID: <5AjL4PbmGc-9jQdiCK1jd4LDdC-B7NgJ_dwIZW1U-aA=.0ad22596-a1f9-4e87-946f-dceedf0a37e5@github.com>

On Tue, 29 Aug 2023 14:06:01 GMT, Roger Riggs <rriggs at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Leo Korinth has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
>> 
>>   copyright
>
> I don't think this is the best change across so many files.
> It gives a very ugly name to a common test function and affects a very large number of tests.

> @RogerRiggs If it is only the name you want changed, maybe you can offer a better name?
@lkorinth 

Sorry for the too short comment; I wanted to make sure it wasn't integrated before I could look at it more closely.
Neither the bug report or the PR describe the problem and its ramifications, only the solution.
Can you elaborate on the conditions that lead to this. (and include them in the bug report).

-------------

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15452#issuecomment-1697803842

From cjplummer at openjdk.org  Tue Aug 29 19:25:12 2023
From: cjplummer at openjdk.org (Chris Plummer)
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2023 19:25:12 GMT
Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8315097: Rename createJavaProcessBuilder [v2]
In-Reply-To: <ISuejqIr1InBH-hXEzgOt7iBXrhH4iv93glC3woOewQ=.3a7357d0-a911-4dfa-834b-2c5123915ce7@github.com>
References: <uiRsPN6Y-xlpEwV-mnXYs8JbFseCnxbtGrxfgUAk2XE=.c9be5d27-e11f-401b-9797-c2943e7a83db@github.com>
 <ISuejqIr1InBH-hXEzgOt7iBXrhH4iv93glC3woOewQ=.3a7357d0-a911-4dfa-834b-2c5123915ce7@github.com>
Message-ID: <SAf3vxbCOAXOTb9egSyc50Z7lt8fCMzE86nBLEHFyrw=.276f82b8-6889-4c50-93fe-5f69ef56f22f@github.com>

On Tue, 29 Aug 2023 09:12:51 GMT, Leo Korinth <lkorinth at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Rename createJavaProcessBuilder so that it is not used by mistake instead of createTestJvm.
>> 
>> I have used the following sed script: `find -name "*.java" | xargs -n 1 sed -i -e "s/createJavaProcessBuilder(/createJavaProcessBuilderIgnoreTestJavaOpts(/g"`
>> 
>> Then I have manually modified ProcessTools.java. In that file I have moved one version of createJavaProcessBuilder so that it is close to the other version. Then I have added a javadoc comment in bold telling:
>> 
>>    /**
>>      * Create ProcessBuilder using the java launcher from the jdk to
>>      * be tested.
>>      *
>>      * <p><b> Please observe that you likely should use
>>      * createTestJvm() instead of this method because createTestJvm()
>>      * will add JVM options from "test.vm.opts" and "test.java.opts"
>>      * </b> and this method will not do that.
>>      *
>>      * @param command Arguments to pass to the java command.
>>      * @return The ProcessBuilder instance representing the java command.
>>      */
>> 
>> 
>> I have used the name createJavaProcessBuilderIgnoreTestJavaOpts because of the name of Utils.prependTestJavaOpts that adds those VM flags. If you have a better name I could do a rename of the method. I kind of like that it is long and clumsy, that makes it harder to use...
>> 
>> I have run tier 1 testing, and I have started more exhaustive testing.
>
> Leo Korinth has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
> 
>   copyright

> I kind of like that it is long and clumsy, that makes it harder to use...

...but it's used in 462 files. That implies it is commonly used. Are you suggesting nearly all those uses are incorrect and eventually should be converted to `createTestJvm()`?

-------------

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15452#issuecomment-1698003837

From dholmes at openjdk.org  Wed Aug 30 07:22:10 2023
From: dholmes at openjdk.org (David Holmes)
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2023 07:22:10 GMT
Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8315097: Rename createJavaProcessBuilder [v2]
In-Reply-To: <5AjL4PbmGc-9jQdiCK1jd4LDdC-B7NgJ_dwIZW1U-aA=.0ad22596-a1f9-4e87-946f-dceedf0a37e5@github.com>
References: <uiRsPN6Y-xlpEwV-mnXYs8JbFseCnxbtGrxfgUAk2XE=.c9be5d27-e11f-401b-9797-c2943e7a83db@github.com>
 <ISuejqIr1InBH-hXEzgOt7iBXrhH4iv93glC3woOewQ=.3a7357d0-a911-4dfa-834b-2c5123915ce7@github.com>
 <pnAnjv8HLt1sykmB9jRamtiVRoTbmwQi9xGuaSnCi10=.34427fd4-7b88-436e-946b-04c7364a1853@github.com>
 <5AjL4PbmGc-9jQdiCK1jd4LDdC-B7NgJ_dwIZW1U-aA=.0ad22596-a1f9-4e87-946f-dceedf0a37e5@github.com>
Message-ID: <LC17h9qCmoHNn4rcN1kgdrvaYOrkTkPXn_BlKTXyN0s=.e1d9cbdc-8991-455b-be06-166476c6436f@github.com>

On Tue, 29 Aug 2023 16:45:12 GMT, Roger Riggs <rriggs at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> I don't think this is the best change across so many files.
>> It gives a very ugly name to a common test function and affects a very large number of tests.
>
>> @RogerRiggs If it is only the name you want changed, maybe you can offer a better name?
> @lkorinth 
> 
> Sorry for the too short comment; I wanted to make sure it wasn't integrated before I could look at it more closely.
> Neither the bug report or the PR describe the problem and its ramifications, only the solution.
> Can you elaborate on the conditions that lead to this. (and include them in the bug report).

@RogerRiggs , @plummercj , please see the additional discussion in the parent bug: https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8314823

-------------

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15452#issuecomment-1698629345

From lkorinth at openjdk.org  Wed Aug 30 09:23:55 2023
From: lkorinth at openjdk.org (Leo Korinth)
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2023 09:23:55 GMT
Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8315097: Rename createJavaProcessBuilder [v3]
In-Reply-To: <uiRsPN6Y-xlpEwV-mnXYs8JbFseCnxbtGrxfgUAk2XE=.c9be5d27-e11f-401b-9797-c2943e7a83db@github.com>
References: <uiRsPN6Y-xlpEwV-mnXYs8JbFseCnxbtGrxfgUAk2XE=.c9be5d27-e11f-401b-9797-c2943e7a83db@github.com>
Message-ID: <yXSuvUGhjCND4oyxnP9Aa0LP-t0XFaMebLzPqEZEGpA=.1658ad96-5848-4a9f-ae75-776cb4076705@github.com>

> Rename createJavaProcessBuilder so that it is not used by mistake instead of createTestJvm.
> 
> I have used the following sed script: `find -name "*.java" | xargs -n 1 sed -i -e "s/createJavaProcessBuilder(/createJavaProcessBuilderIgnoreTestJavaOpts(/g"`
> 
> Then I have manually modified ProcessTools.java. In that file I have moved one version of createJavaProcessBuilder so that it is close to the other version. Then I have added a javadoc comment in bold telling:
> 
>    /**
>      * Create ProcessBuilder using the java launcher from the jdk to
>      * be tested.
>      *
>      * <p><b> Please observe that you likely should use
>      * createTestJvm() instead of this method because createTestJvm()
>      * will add JVM options from "test.vm.opts" and "test.java.opts"
>      * </b> and this method will not do that.
>      *
>      * @param command Arguments to pass to the java command.
>      * @return The ProcessBuilder instance representing the java command.
>      */
> 
> 
> I have used the name createJavaProcessBuilderIgnoreTestJavaOpts because of the name of Utils.prependTestJavaOpts that adds those VM flags. If you have a better name I could do a rename of the method. I kind of like that it is long and clumsy, that makes it harder to use...
> 
> I have run tier 1 testing, and I have started more exhaustive testing.

Leo Korinth has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:

  fix static import

-------------

Changes:
  - all: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15452/files
  - new: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15452/files/f3418c80..27da7150

Webrevs:
 - full: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=15452&range=02
 - incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=15452&range=01-02

  Stats: 2 lines in 1 file changed: 0 ins; 1 del; 1 mod
  Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15452.diff
  Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/15452/head:pull/15452

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15452

From msheppar at openjdk.org  Wed Aug 30 11:34:12 2023
From: msheppar at openjdk.org (Mark Sheppard)
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2023 11:34:12 GMT
Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8315097: Rename createJavaProcessBuilder [v3]
In-Reply-To: <yXSuvUGhjCND4oyxnP9Aa0LP-t0XFaMebLzPqEZEGpA=.1658ad96-5848-4a9f-ae75-776cb4076705@github.com>
References: <uiRsPN6Y-xlpEwV-mnXYs8JbFseCnxbtGrxfgUAk2XE=.c9be5d27-e11f-401b-9797-c2943e7a83db@github.com>
 <yXSuvUGhjCND4oyxnP9Aa0LP-t0XFaMebLzPqEZEGpA=.1658ad96-5848-4a9f-ae75-776cb4076705@github.com>
Message-ID: <wVUv1MM9_YCMellQujMDEORehLIrVzlkDgDgTiLM3f8=.0693ba3b-61bb-4af2-b680-dabb4ec099aa@github.com>

On Wed, 30 Aug 2023 09:23:55 GMT, Leo Korinth <lkorinth at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Rename createJavaProcessBuilder so that it is not used by mistake instead of createTestJvm.
>> 
>> I have used the following sed script: `find -name "*.java" | xargs -n 1 sed -i -e "s/createJavaProcessBuilder(/createJavaProcessBuilderIgnoreTestJavaOpts(/g"`
>> 
>> Then I have manually modified ProcessTools.java. In that file I have moved one version of createJavaProcessBuilder so that it is close to the other version. Then I have added a javadoc comment in bold telling:
>> 
>>    /**
>>      * Create ProcessBuilder using the java launcher from the jdk to
>>      * be tested.
>>      *
>>      * <p><b> Please observe that you likely should use
>>      * createTestJvm() instead of this method because createTestJvm()
>>      * will add JVM options from "test.vm.opts" and "test.java.opts"
>>      * </b> and this method will not do that.
>>      *
>>      * @param command Arguments to pass to the java command.
>>      * @return The ProcessBuilder instance representing the java command.
>>      */
>> 
>> 
>> I have used the name createJavaProcessBuilderIgnoreTestJavaOpts because of the name of Utils.prependTestJavaOpts that adds those VM flags. If you have a better name I could do a rename of the method. I kind of like that it is long and clumsy, that makes it harder to use...
>> 
>> I have run tier 1 testing, and I have started more exhaustive testing.
>
> Leo Korinth has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
> 
>   fix static import

I don't think  a name change is required. The method is createJavaProcessBuilder with a "list" of argurments and a builder is returned. As such, there is no inference, in the name, that test args will be propagated. Adding the additional java doc description should be sufficient to dispell any misconceptions. 
The createTestJvm is a misnomer as it returns a ProcessBulder rather than a Process, which is what I would expected from createTestJvm, without looking at its signature.

So you could create a single createJavaProcessBuilder with add an additional parameter boolean addTestOpts e.g.
createJavaProcessBuilder(List<String> command, boolean addTestOpts) { ... }

createProcessBuilderIgnoreJavaTestOpt(cmdArgs)  maps to createJavaProcessBuilder(cmdArgs, false)

createTestJvm(cmdArgs) maps to createJavaProcessBuilder(cmdArgs, true)

But this is a lot more work.

alternatively change createTestJvm to createTestJavaProcessBuilder  or createJavaProcessBuilderAddTestOpts

-------------

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15452#issuecomment-1698985460

From rriggs at openjdk.org  Wed Aug 30 15:10:13 2023
From: rriggs at openjdk.org (Roger Riggs)
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2023 15:10:13 GMT
Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8315097: Rename createJavaProcessBuilder [v3]
In-Reply-To: <yXSuvUGhjCND4oyxnP9Aa0LP-t0XFaMebLzPqEZEGpA=.1658ad96-5848-4a9f-ae75-776cb4076705@github.com>
References: <uiRsPN6Y-xlpEwV-mnXYs8JbFseCnxbtGrxfgUAk2XE=.c9be5d27-e11f-401b-9797-c2943e7a83db@github.com>
 <yXSuvUGhjCND4oyxnP9Aa0LP-t0XFaMebLzPqEZEGpA=.1658ad96-5848-4a9f-ae75-776cb4076705@github.com>
Message-ID: <QhskrdnUTvPoXQkFzEXv6cXGiyHNCtGZ4NiHqz5SO_s=.7d87a087-bf3a-4ae8-8aa4-999220667db7@github.com>

On Wed, 30 Aug 2023 09:23:55 GMT, Leo Korinth <lkorinth at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Rename createJavaProcessBuilder so that it is not used by mistake instead of createTestJvm.
>> 
>> I have used the following sed script: `find -name "*.java" | xargs -n 1 sed -i -e "s/createJavaProcessBuilder(/createJavaProcessBuilderIgnoreTestJavaOpts(/g"`
>> 
>> Then I have manually modified ProcessTools.java. In that file I have moved one version of createJavaProcessBuilder so that it is close to the other version. Then I have added a javadoc comment in bold telling:
>> 
>>    /**
>>      * Create ProcessBuilder using the java launcher from the jdk to
>>      * be tested.
>>      *
>>      * <p><b> Please observe that you likely should use
>>      * createTestJvm() instead of this method because createTestJvm()
>>      * will add JVM options from "test.vm.opts" and "test.java.opts"
>>      * </b> and this method will not do that.
>>      *
>>      * @param command Arguments to pass to the java command.
>>      * @return The ProcessBuilder instance representing the java command.
>>      */
>> 
>> 
>> I have used the name createJavaProcessBuilderIgnoreTestJavaOpts because of the name of Utils.prependTestJavaOpts that adds those VM flags. If you have a better name I could do a rename of the method. I kind of like that it is long and clumsy, that makes it harder to use...
>> 
>> I have run tier 1 testing, and I have started more exhaustive testing.
>
> Leo Korinth has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
> 
>   fix static import

In the context of the goal is to declaratively identify tests that do or do not benefit from additional test flags renaming the `createjavaProcessBuilder` method does not further that goal.

The method name and javadoc of `createjavaProcessBuilder` do not imply that the test options are consulted or used; it only says it creates a ProcessBuilder, and does not promise or document more than that.  The javadoc should probably describe the use of the the three properties that modify the way that the java is launched.

-------------

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15452#issuecomment-1699362435

From lkorinth at openjdk.org  Wed Aug 30 17:13:53 2023
From: lkorinth at openjdk.org (Leo Korinth)
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2023 17:13:53 GMT
Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8315097: Rename createJavaProcessBuilder [v3]
In-Reply-To: <yXSuvUGhjCND4oyxnP9Aa0LP-t0XFaMebLzPqEZEGpA=.1658ad96-5848-4a9f-ae75-776cb4076705@github.com>
References: <uiRsPN6Y-xlpEwV-mnXYs8JbFseCnxbtGrxfgUAk2XE=.c9be5d27-e11f-401b-9797-c2943e7a83db@github.com>
 <yXSuvUGhjCND4oyxnP9Aa0LP-t0XFaMebLzPqEZEGpA=.1658ad96-5848-4a9f-ae75-776cb4076705@github.com>
Message-ID: <3xqrbByJLBJTDN1-C_aG0wwe6PFy09-tMyL0TwEn4Gc=.88dbe2a2-ad5d-4545-ab30-4a9e5312641f@github.com>

On Wed, 30 Aug 2023 09:23:55 GMT, Leo Korinth <lkorinth at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Rename createJavaProcessBuilder so that it is not used by mistake instead of createTestJvm.
>> 
>> I have used the following sed script: `find -name "*.java" | xargs -n 1 sed -i -e "s/createJavaProcessBuilder(/createJavaProcessBuilderIgnoreTestJavaOpts(/g"`
>> 
>> Then I have manually modified ProcessTools.java. In that file I have moved one version of createJavaProcessBuilder so that it is close to the other version. Then I have added a javadoc comment in bold telling:
>> 
>>    /**
>>      * Create ProcessBuilder using the java launcher from the jdk to
>>      * be tested.
>>      *
>>      * <p><b> Please observe that you likely should use
>>      * createTestJvm() instead of this method because createTestJvm()
>>      * will add JVM options from "test.vm.opts" and "test.java.opts"
>>      * </b> and this method will not do that.
>>      *
>>      * @param command Arguments to pass to the java command.
>>      * @return The ProcessBuilder instance representing the java command.
>>      */
>> 
>> 
>> I have used the name createJavaProcessBuilderIgnoreTestJavaOpts because of the name of Utils.prependTestJavaOpts that adds those VM flags. If you have a better name I could do a rename of the method. I kind of like that it is long and clumsy, that makes it harder to use...
>> 
>> I have run tier 1 testing, and I have started more exhaustive testing.
>
> Leo Korinth has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
> 
>   fix static import

I have some ideas that I will work on that might lead to a new proposal.

-------------

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15452#issuecomment-1699542111

From stefank at openjdk.org  Wed Aug 30 17:40:33 2023
From: stefank at openjdk.org (Stefan Karlsson)
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2023 17:40:33 GMT
Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8315097: Rename createJavaProcessBuilder [v3]
In-Reply-To: <yXSuvUGhjCND4oyxnP9Aa0LP-t0XFaMebLzPqEZEGpA=.1658ad96-5848-4a9f-ae75-776cb4076705@github.com>
References: <uiRsPN6Y-xlpEwV-mnXYs8JbFseCnxbtGrxfgUAk2XE=.c9be5d27-e11f-401b-9797-c2943e7a83db@github.com>
 <yXSuvUGhjCND4oyxnP9Aa0LP-t0XFaMebLzPqEZEGpA=.1658ad96-5848-4a9f-ae75-776cb4076705@github.com>
Message-ID: <VAAsfW_V1GEfQezmwBQwvXa3svN5cMzanUtpk4W4kv8=.6ff00b4d-01f4-4607-a7be-b17ae9669ae3@github.com>

On Wed, 30 Aug 2023 09:23:55 GMT, Leo Korinth <lkorinth at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Rename createJavaProcessBuilder so that it is not used by mistake instead of createTestJvm.
>> 
>> I have used the following sed script: `find -name "*.java" | xargs -n 1 sed -i -e "s/createJavaProcessBuilder(/createJavaProcessBuilderIgnoreTestJavaOpts(/g"`
>> 
>> Then I have manually modified ProcessTools.java. In that file I have moved one version of createJavaProcessBuilder so that it is close to the other version. Then I have added a javadoc comment in bold telling:
>> 
>>    /**
>>      * Create ProcessBuilder using the java launcher from the jdk to
>>      * be tested.
>>      *
>>      * <p><b> Please observe that you likely should use
>>      * createTestJvm() instead of this method because createTestJvm()
>>      * will add JVM options from "test.vm.opts" and "test.java.opts"
>>      * </b> and this method will not do that.
>>      *
>>      * @param command Arguments to pass to the java command.
>>      * @return The ProcessBuilder instance representing the java command.
>>      */
>> 
>> 
>> I have used the name createJavaProcessBuilderIgnoreTestJavaOpts because of the name of Utils.prependTestJavaOpts that adds those VM flags. If you have a better name I could do a rename of the method. I kind of like that it is long and clumsy, that makes it harder to use...
>> 
>> I have run tier 1 testing, and I have started more exhaustive testing.
>
> Leo Korinth has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
> 
>   fix static import

>From talking to other HotSpot devs it is quite clear that the different names lead to mistakes when writing (copy-n-pasting) tests, so I'm happy that we try to figure out some way to make it more obvious when we prepend the extra test options and when we don't.

I agree with @msheppar that `createTestJvm` isn't a good name and I wouldn't be opposed to changing that name instead of `createJavaProcessBuilder`. However, if we do rename that function I strongly urge us to also rename the corresponding `executeTestJvm` function.

I also think it is too obscure that functions with *Test* in the name prepend the extra test options, and those without *Test* don't, so I'd like to get rid of that convention. 

I wouldn't be opposed to a change that:
* Keeps the `createJavaProcessBuilder` name
* Renames `createTestJvm` to `createJavaProcessBuilderPrependTestOpts`
* Renames `executeTestJvm` to `executeJavaPrependTestOpts`
* Removes `createTestJava`
* Removes `executeTestJava`

-------------

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15452#issuecomment-1699588853

From dholmes at openjdk.org  Thu Aug 31 05:48:04 2023
From: dholmes at openjdk.org (David Holmes)
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2023 05:48:04 GMT
Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8315097: Rename createJavaProcessBuilder [v3]
In-Reply-To: <wVUv1MM9_YCMellQujMDEORehLIrVzlkDgDgTiLM3f8=.0693ba3b-61bb-4af2-b680-dabb4ec099aa@github.com>
References: <uiRsPN6Y-xlpEwV-mnXYs8JbFseCnxbtGrxfgUAk2XE=.c9be5d27-e11f-401b-9797-c2943e7a83db@github.com>
 <yXSuvUGhjCND4oyxnP9Aa0LP-t0XFaMebLzPqEZEGpA=.1658ad96-5848-4a9f-ae75-776cb4076705@github.com>
 <wVUv1MM9_YCMellQujMDEORehLIrVzlkDgDgTiLM3f8=.0693ba3b-61bb-4af2-b680-dabb4ec099aa@github.com>
Message-ID: <sXekzx-YhGFu-1-ONgzSYf1puehFR4QlJ2OaiCT_q98=.b2781fc0-3201-4a24-af79-143b94260469@github.com>

On Wed, 30 Aug 2023 11:31:20 GMT, Mark Sheppard <msheppar at openjdk.org> wrote:

> So you could create a single createJavaProcessBuilder with add an additional parameter boolean addTestOpts e.g.
createJavaProcessBuilder(List command, boolean addTestOpts) { ... }

@msheppar that is actually where we started, and it was then split into two differently named methods to "make it clear" which one included the test opts without having to remember the name of the parameter that the true/false argument was bound to.

-------------

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15452#issuecomment-1700402301

From alanb at openjdk.org  Thu Aug 31 06:51:00 2023
From: alanb at openjdk.org (Alan Bateman)
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2023 06:51:00 GMT
Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8315097: Rename createJavaProcessBuilder [v3]
In-Reply-To: <VAAsfW_V1GEfQezmwBQwvXa3svN5cMzanUtpk4W4kv8=.6ff00b4d-01f4-4607-a7be-b17ae9669ae3@github.com>
References: <uiRsPN6Y-xlpEwV-mnXYs8JbFseCnxbtGrxfgUAk2XE=.c9be5d27-e11f-401b-9797-c2943e7a83db@github.com>
 <yXSuvUGhjCND4oyxnP9Aa0LP-t0XFaMebLzPqEZEGpA=.1658ad96-5848-4a9f-ae75-776cb4076705@github.com>
 <VAAsfW_V1GEfQezmwBQwvXa3svN5cMzanUtpk4W4kv8=.6ff00b4d-01f4-4607-a7be-b17ae9669ae3@github.com>
Message-ID: <RdenHruw4C5Yd3ZAu4G-QXF00NV99-fdZUipQwrPJ4M=.4329acd6-8a3a-4aed-9384-35cd8e2a6246@github.com>

On Wed, 30 Aug 2023 17:38:01 GMT, Stefan Karlsson <stefank at openjdk.org> wrote:

> I wouldn't be opposed to a change that:
> 
> * Keeps the `createJavaProcessBuilder` name
> * Renames `createTestJvm` to `createJavaProcessBuilderPrependTestOpts`
> * Renames `executeTestJvm` to `executeJavaPrependTestOpts`
> * Removes `createTestJava`
> * Removes `executeTestJava`

The good thing with this is that it very explicit at the use-sites where the test opts are prepended. Also moving from "Jvm" to "Java" is probably right as it executes the "java" launcher, the options are a mix of java launcher options (that the VM doesn't know about) and VM options.

-------------

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15452#issuecomment-1700459277

From msheppar at openjdk.org  Thu Aug 31 10:11:02 2023
From: msheppar at openjdk.org (Mark Sheppard)
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2023 10:11:02 GMT
Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8315097: Rename createJavaProcessBuilder [v3]
In-Reply-To: <sXekzx-YhGFu-1-ONgzSYf1puehFR4QlJ2OaiCT_q98=.b2781fc0-3201-4a24-af79-143b94260469@github.com>
References: <uiRsPN6Y-xlpEwV-mnXYs8JbFseCnxbtGrxfgUAk2XE=.c9be5d27-e11f-401b-9797-c2943e7a83db@github.com>
 <yXSuvUGhjCND4oyxnP9Aa0LP-t0XFaMebLzPqEZEGpA=.1658ad96-5848-4a9f-ae75-776cb4076705@github.com>
 <wVUv1MM9_YCMellQujMDEORehLIrVzlkDgDgTiLM3f8=.0693ba3b-61bb-4af2-b680-dabb4ec099aa@github.com>
 <sXekzx-YhGFu-1-ONgzSYf1puehFR4QlJ2OaiCT_q98=.b2781fc0-3201-4a24-af79-143b94260469@github.com>
Message-ID: <vCLRZwJrzYryyifx7o1JmbNDvnCt9bPwJKPd3DqOR30=.447ed116-dbae-4192-8300-ac7eaba309b3@github.com>

On Thu, 31 Aug 2023 05:45:27 GMT, David Holmes <dholmes at openjdk.org> wrote:

> > So you could create a single createJavaProcessBuilder with add an additional parameter boolean addTestOpts e.g.
> > createJavaProcessBuilder(List command, boolean addTestOpts) { ... }
> 
> @msheppar that is actually where we started, and it was then split into two differently named methods to "make it clear" which one included the test opts without having to remember the name of the parameter that the true/false argument was bound to.

cheers David  thanks for the clarification on background

-------------

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15452#issuecomment-1700749844