From lmesnik at openjdk.org Thu Oct 5 05:43:17 2023 From: lmesnik at openjdk.org (Leonid Mesnik) Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2023 05:43:17 GMT Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8316447: 8 sun/management/jmxremote tests ignore VM flags Message-ID: Updated test to use createTesJvm. Removed internal timeout to not fail when Xcomp is used and also to get more info if the test times out., Tested by running tier1, hs-tier5 and executing test with various VM flags. ------------- Commit messages: - jdp test removed from commit. - 8316447: 5 sun/management/jmxremote tests ignore VM flags Changes: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/16048/files Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=16048&range=00 Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8316447 Stats: 29 lines in 9 files changed: 0 ins; 12 del; 17 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/16048.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/16048/head:pull/16048 PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/16048 From kevinw at openjdk.org Thu Oct 5 08:34:10 2023 From: kevinw at openjdk.org (Kevin Walls) Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2023 08:34:10 GMT Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8316447: 8 sun/management/jmxremote tests ignore VM flags In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <8GwsX83n0TOLtsgxpDLqYAzryUEHuozQw6hJzZJ9VIo=.2b833df2-2e88-4624-bfab-4dd744c318c3@github.com> On Thu, 5 Oct 2023 05:32:20 GMT, Leonid Mesnik wrote: > Updated test to use createTesJvm. > Removed internal timeout to not fail when Xcomp is used and also to get more info if the test times out., > > Tested by running tier1, hs-tier5 and executing test with various VM flags. Looks good - test/jdk/sun/management/jmxremote/bootstrap/JMXAgentInterfaceBinding.java private boolean jmxAgentStarted = false; ...this line can be removed as well I think. ProcessTools does have createTestJvm(List command), so the frequent toArray seems unnecessary. The method does toArray itself 8-) and is recent compared to some of the tests, so maybe the tests haven't changed since ProcessTools createJavaProcessBuilder and createTestJvm added versions that takes a List. ------------- Marked as reviewed by kevinw (Committer). PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/16048#pullrequestreview-1659212949 From lmesnik at openjdk.org Thu Oct 5 16:03:02 2023 From: lmesnik at openjdk.org (Leonid Mesnik) Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2023 16:03:02 GMT Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8316447: 8 sun/management/jmxremote tests ignore VM flags In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <0VhUV4CJoy1OCaaSfswywSQ65Tj8KmuboglgktIn0Kk=.5d5f05ae-6251-4b75-b10c-38d03bf85d09@github.com> On Thu, 5 Oct 2023 05:32:20 GMT, Leonid Mesnik wrote: > Updated test to use createTesJvm. > Removed internal timeout to not fail when Xcomp is used and also to get more info if the test times out., > > Tested by running tier1, hs-tier5 and executing test with various VM flags. Thank you for your review and feedback. I removed private boolean jmxAgentStarted = false; The changes invocations to createTestJvm are needed because it added tested flags only. ------------- PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/16048#issuecomment-1749194522 From kevinw at openjdk.org Thu Oct 5 16:29:43 2023 From: kevinw at openjdk.org (Kevin Walls) Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2023 16:29:43 GMT Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8316447: 8 sun/management/jmxremote tests ignore VM flags In-Reply-To: <0VhUV4CJoy1OCaaSfswywSQ65Tj8KmuboglgktIn0Kk=.5d5f05ae-6251-4b75-b10c-38d03bf85d09@github.com> References: <0VhUV4CJoy1OCaaSfswywSQ65Tj8KmuboglgktIn0Kk=.5d5f05ae-6251-4b75-b10c-38d03bf85d09@github.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 5 Oct 2023 16:00:21 GMT, Leonid Mesnik wrote: > Thank you for your review and feedback. I removed private boolean jmxAgentStarted = false; The changes invocations to createTestJvm are needed because it added tested flags only. OK thanks. I was observing that we want to call ProcessTools.createTestJvm(), as it calls createJavaProcessBuilder(Utils.prependTestJavaOpts(command)). When we have the arguments/command in a List, there is a createTestJvm method that takes a List, but here we convert to an array and pass that. ------------- PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/16048#issuecomment-1749264504 From lmesnik at openjdk.org Thu Oct 5 18:21:06 2023 From: lmesnik at openjdk.org (Leonid Mesnik) Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2023 18:21:06 GMT Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8316447: 8 sun/management/jmxremote tests ignore VM flags [v2] In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > Updated test to use createTesJvm. > Removed internal timeout to not fail when Xcomp is used and also to get more info if the test times out., > > Tested by running tier1, hs-tier5 and executing test with various VM flags. Leonid Mesnik has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision: simplifed usage, removed classpath adding. ------------- Changes: - all: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/16048/files - new: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/16048/files/b8ddc215..e78349a1 Webrevs: - full: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=16048&range=01 - incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=16048&range=00-01 Stats: 15 lines in 7 files changed: 0 ins; 11 del; 4 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/16048.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/16048/head:pull/16048 PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/16048 From lmesnik at openjdk.org Thu Oct 5 18:25:22 2023 From: lmesnik at openjdk.org (Leonid Mesnik) Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2023 18:25:22 GMT Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8316447: 8 sun/management/jmxremote tests ignore VM flags [v2] In-Reply-To: References:

Message-ID: On Thu, 5 Oct 2023 18:21:06 GMT, Leonid Mesnik wrote: >> Updated test to use createTesJvm. >> Removed internal timeout to not fail when Xcomp is used and also to get more info if the test times out., >> >> Tested by running tier1, hs-tier5 and executing test with various VM flags. > > Leonid Mesnik has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision: > > simplifed usage, removed classpath adding. Thanks, I simplified tests. ------------- PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/16048#issuecomment-1749427610 From lmesnik at openjdk.org Fri Oct 6 20:02:36 2023 From: lmesnik at openjdk.org (Leonid Mesnik) Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2023 20:02:36 GMT Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8316446: 4 sun/management/jdp tests ignore VM flags Message-ID: The launcher class is fixed. Tested by tier1 and running test with different VM flags ------------- Commit messages: - 8316446 Changes: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/16079/files Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=16079&range=00 Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8316446 Stats: 2 lines in 1 file changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 2 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/16079.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/16079/head:pull/16079 PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/16079 From sspitsyn at openjdk.org Fri Oct 6 23:25:35 2023 From: sspitsyn at openjdk.org (Serguei Spitsyn) Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2023 23:25:35 GMT Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8316447: 8 sun/management/jmxremote tests ignore VM flags [v2] In-Reply-To: References:

Message-ID: On Thu, 5 Oct 2023 18:21:06 GMT, Leonid Mesnik wrote: >> Updated test to use createTesJvm. >> Removed internal timeout to not fail when Xcomp is used and also to get more info if the test times out., >> >> Tested by running tier1, hs-tier5 and executing test with various VM flags. > > Leonid Mesnik has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision: > > simplifed usage, removed classpath adding. Looks good to me. Thanks, Serguei test/jdk/sun/management/jmxremote/bootstrap/CustomLauncherTest.java line 100: > 98: ProcessBuilder client = ProcessTools.createJavaProcessBuilder( > 99: "-cp", > 100: Utils.TEST_CLASS_PATH, Just a question: Is the `-cp` options added by the `ProcessTools.createTestJvm()`? ------------- Marked as reviewed by sspitsyn (Reviewer). PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/16048#pullrequestreview-1662878526 PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/16048#discussion_r1349370651 From lmesnik at openjdk.org Fri Oct 6 23:25:35 2023 From: lmesnik at openjdk.org (Leonid Mesnik) Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2023 23:25:35 GMT Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8316447: 8 sun/management/jmxremote tests ignore VM flags [v2] In-Reply-To: References:

Message-ID: <5mYLh84dkPwnjTR1ZMbZxZfKYknGKlvRDu6owtDYAbo=.f1417934-f8da-4663-8553-651cff171bc1@github.com> On Fri, 6 Oct 2023 22:34:40 GMT, Serguei Spitsyn wrote: >> Leonid Mesnik has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision: >> >> simplifed usage, removed classpath adding. > > test/jdk/sun/management/jmxremote/bootstrap/CustomLauncherTest.java line 100: > >> 98: ProcessBuilder client = ProcessTools.createJavaProcessBuilder( >> 99: "-cp", >> 100: Utils.TEST_CLASS_PATH, > > Just a question: Is the `-cp` options added by the `ProcessTools.createTestJvm()`? It is added even by ProcessTools.createJavaProcessBuilder(..) so it is not needed here. ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/16048#discussion_r1349386018 From cjplummer at openjdk.org Fri Oct 6 23:38:31 2023 From: cjplummer at openjdk.org (Chris Plummer) Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2023 23:38:31 GMT Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8316446: 4 sun/management/jdp tests ignore VM flags In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Fri, 6 Oct 2023 19:55:59 GMT, Leonid Mesnik wrote: > The launcher class is fixed. > Tested by tier1 and running test with different VM flags Marked as reviewed by cjplummer (Reviewer). ------------- PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/16079#pullrequestreview-1662907976 From kevinw at openjdk.org Mon Oct 9 08:18:11 2023 From: kevinw at openjdk.org (Kevin Walls) Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2023 08:18:11 GMT Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8316446: 4 sun/management/jdp tests ignore VM flags In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Fri, 6 Oct 2023 19:55:59 GMT, Leonid Mesnik wrote: > The launcher class is fixed. > Tested by tier1 and running test with different VM flags Marked as reviewed by kevinw (Committer). ------------- PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/16079#pullrequestreview-1663928691 From lmesnik at openjdk.org Mon Oct 9 23:13:10 2023 From: lmesnik at openjdk.org (Leonid Mesnik) Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2023 23:13:10 GMT Subject: jmx-dev Integrated: 8316446: 4 sun/management/jdp tests ignore VM flags In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Fri, 6 Oct 2023 19:55:59 GMT, Leonid Mesnik wrote: > The launcher class is fixed. > Tested by tier1 and running test with different VM flags This pull request has now been integrated. Changeset: 5b311f20 Author: Leonid Mesnik URL: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/commit/5b311f20dfaed0f34d38e8c5c6b90d97ffc75172 Stats: 2 lines in 1 file changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 2 mod 8316446: 4 sun/management/jdp tests ignore VM flags Reviewed-by: cjplummer, kevinw ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/16079 From lmesnik at openjdk.org Mon Oct 9 23:13:26 2023 From: lmesnik at openjdk.org (Leonid Mesnik) Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2023 23:13:26 GMT Subject: jmx-dev Integrated: 8316447: 8 sun/management/jmxremote tests ignore VM flags In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, 5 Oct 2023 05:32:20 GMT, Leonid Mesnik wrote: > Updated test to use createTesJvm. > Removed internal timeout to not fail when Xcomp is used and also to get more info if the test times out., > > Tested by running tier1, hs-tier5 and executing test with various VM flags. This pull request has now been integrated. Changeset: 053f4569 Author: Leonid Mesnik URL: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/commit/053f45695f9a914452f39029bd9ac7eb329e6883 Stats: 40 lines in 9 files changed: 0 ins; 23 del; 17 mod 8316447: 8 sun/management/jmxremote tests ignore VM flags Reviewed-by: kevinw, sspitsyn ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/16048 From lkorinth at openjdk.org Tue Oct 17 12:29:46 2023 From: lkorinth at openjdk.org (Leo Korinth) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2023 12:29:46 GMT Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8315097: Rename createJavaProcessBuilder [v4] In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4pRda3ZAZzVzGiVrDv6LN9Pw__DhrmTm4qZjTHzaq80=.a009bb29-4869-4047-8b62-80fbe7bef692@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. > * > *

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" > * 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 three additional commits since the last revision: - Revert "8315097: Rename createJavaProcessBuilder" This reverts commit 4b2d171133c40c5c48114602bfd0d4da75531317. - Revert "copyright" This reverts commit f3418c80cc0d4cbb722ee5e368f1a001e898b43e. - Revert "fix static import" This reverts commit 27da71508aec9a4bec1c0ad07031887286580171. ------------- Changes: - all: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15452/files - new: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15452/files/27da7150..44af07b9 Webrevs: - full: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=15452&range=03 - incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=15452&range=02-03 Stats: 1102 lines in 462 files changed: 11 ins; 22 del; 1069 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 lkorinth at openjdk.org Thu Oct 19 15:16:13 2023 From: lkorinth at openjdk.org (Leo Korinth) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2023 15:16:13 GMT Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8315097: Rename createJavaProcessBuilder [v5] In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > 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. > * > *

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" > * 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 with a new target base due to a merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains ten commits: - Batch update using sed find -name "*.java" | xargs -n 1 sed -i -e "s/createJavaProcessBuilder(/createLimitedJavaTestProcessBuilder(/g" find -name "*.java" | xargs -n 1 sed -i -e "s/createTestJvm(/createJavaTestProcessBuilder(/g" find -name "*.java" | xargs -n 1 sed -i -e "s/import static jdk.test.lib.process.ProcessTools.createJavaProcessBuilder/import static jdk.test.lib.process.ProcessTools.createLimitedJavaTestProcessBuilder/g" - Merge branch '_master_jdk' into _8315097 - explain usage - Revert "8315097: Rename createJavaProcessBuilder" This reverts commit 4b2d171133c40c5c48114602bfd0d4da75531317. - Revert "copyright" This reverts commit f3418c80cc0d4cbb722ee5e368f1a001e898b43e. - Revert "fix static import" This reverts commit 27da71508aec9a4bec1c0ad07031887286580171. - fix static import - copyright - 8315097: Rename createJavaProcessBuilder ------------- Changes: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15452/files Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=15452&range=04 Stats: 894 lines in 560 files changed: 34 ins; 10 del; 850 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 lkorinth at openjdk.org Thu Oct 19 15:16:42 2023 From: lkorinth at openjdk.org (Leo Korinth) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2023 15:16:42 GMT Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8315097: Rename createJavaProcessBuilder [v4] In-Reply-To: <4pRda3ZAZzVzGiVrDv6LN9Pw__DhrmTm4qZjTHzaq80=.a009bb29-4869-4047-8b62-80fbe7bef692@github.com> References: <4pRda3ZAZzVzGiVrDv6LN9Pw__DhrmTm4qZjTHzaq80=.a009bb29-4869-4047-8b62-80fbe7bef692@github.com> Message-ID: <3XTw5IAFj_YpaMrqyLdO9mNbWDENFMVkwk8JBmKHDcE=.5e4b1c70-0b36-4ff5-9cce-ee4f25a8e3bb@github.com> On Tue, 17 Oct 2023 12:29:46 GMT, Leo Korinth 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. >> * >> *

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" > * 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 six additional commits since the last revision: - static import - copyright - whitespace - whitespace - sed - fix test/lib/jdk/test/lib/process/ProcessTools.java ------------- Changes: - all: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15452/files - new: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15452/files/f80dda8d..2f57a32d Webrevs: - full: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=15452&range=05 - incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=15452&range=04-05 Stats: 1580 lines in 560 files changed: 44 ins; 34 del; 1502 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 lkorinth at openjdk.org Tue Oct 24 09:10:43 2023 From: lkorinth at openjdk.org (Leo Korinth) Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2023 09:10:43 GMT Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8315097: Rename createJavaProcessBuilder [v6] In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, 24 Oct 2023 07:49:30 GMT, Leo Korinth 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. >> * >> *

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" >> * 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 six additional commits since the last revision: > > - static import > - copyright > - whitespace > - whitespace > - sed > - fix test/lib/jdk/test/lib/process/ProcessTools.java Marked as reviewed by stefank (Reviewer). ------------- PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15452#pullrequestreview-1694437335 From lmesnik at openjdk.org Tue Oct 24 17:04:41 2023 From: lmesnik at openjdk.org (Leonid Mesnik) Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2023 17:04:41 GMT Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8315097: Rename createJavaProcessBuilder [v6] In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, 24 Oct 2023 07:49:30 GMT, Leo Korinth wrote: >> This pull request renames `createJavaProcessBuilder` to `createLimitedTestJavaProcessBuilder` and renames `createTestJvm` to `createTestJavaProcessBuilder`. Both are implemented through a private `createJavaProcessBuilder`. It also updates the java doc. >> >> This is so that it should be harder to by mistake use `createLimitedTestJavaProcessBuilder` that is problematic because it will not forward JVM flags to the tested JVM. > > Leo Korinth has updated the pull request incrementally with six additional commits since the last revision: > > - static import > - copyright > - whitespace > - whitespace > - sed > - fix test/lib/jdk/test/lib/process/ProcessTools.java Marked as reviewed by lmesnik (Reviewer). ------------- PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15452#pullrequestreview-1695447658 From rriggs at openjdk.org Tue Oct 24 19:42:43 2023 From: rriggs at openjdk.org (Roger Riggs) Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2023 19:42:43 GMT Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8315097: Rename createJavaProcessBuilder [v6] In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6qyfRp98A2DA7Q7YhscmdmokkIvVVn9HxB_XjRdM47g=.615d7a65-e109-41db-b955-31c0a934debd@github.com> On Tue, 24 Oct 2023 07:49:30 GMT, Leo Korinth wrote: >> This pull request renames `createJavaProcessBuilder` to `createLimitedTestJavaProcessBuilder` and renames `createTestJvm` to `createTestJavaProcessBuilder`. Both are implemented through a private `createJavaProcessBuilder`. It also updates the java doc. >> >> This is so that it should be harder to by mistake use `createLimitedTestJavaProcessBuilder` that is problematic because it will not forward JVM flags to the tested JVM. > > Leo Korinth has updated the pull request incrementally with six additional commits since the last revision: > > - static import > - copyright > - whitespace > - whitespace > - sed > - fix test/lib/jdk/test/lib/process/ProcessTools.java test/lib/jdk/test/lib/process/ProcessTools.java line 506: > 504: */ > 505: public static ProcessBuilder createTestJavaProcessBuilder(List command) { > 506: return createTestJavaProcessBuilder(command.toArray(String[]::new)); The javadoc shoul d describe all of the options being added to the ProcessBuilder. They were inadequated described previously and still are. The other options (seem to be from the code), test.noclasspath, java.class.path, and test.thread.factory. The description of test.thread.factory and addTestThreadFactoryArgs method seems inadequately described. test/lib/jdk/test/lib/process/ProcessTools.java line 527: > 525: * Create ProcessBuilder using the java launcher from the jdk to > 526: * be tested. > 527: * As above, should described the limited options that are added to the ProcessBuilder, the same as for `reateTestJavaProcessBuilder(...)` test/lib/jdk/test/lib/process/ProcessTools.java line 549: > 547: * Create ProcessBuilder using the java launcher from the jdk to > 548: * be tested. > 549: * As above, should described the limited options that are added to the ProcessBuilder, the same as for reateTestJavaProcessBuilder(...) test/lib/jdk/test/lib/process/ProcessTools.java line 599: > 597: */ > 598: public static OutputAnalyzer executeTestJvm(String... cmds) throws Exception { > 599: ProcessBuilder pb = createTestJavaProcessBuilder(cmds); This should also describe *all* of the options being set in the ProcessBuilder before executing the process. ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15452#discussion_r1370728371 PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15452#discussion_r1370729609 PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15452#discussion_r1370729925 PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15452#discussion_r1370730637 From stefank at openjdk.org Wed Oct 25 07:27:32 2023 From: stefank at openjdk.org (Stefan Karlsson) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2023 07:27:32 GMT Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8315097: Rename createJavaProcessBuilder [v3] In-Reply-To: References: <5o5B7LbCQN_C9xzd1EvrvTp04-6Atr0gih5WH69LeK4=.3a977034-8fe9-4da8-a167-f5dad3a97d75@github.com> Message-ID: On Tue, 5 Sep 2023 18:05:34 GMT, Roger Riggs wrote: >> I have created an alternative that uses enums to force the user to make a decision: https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/compare/master...lkorinth:jdk:+process_tools . Another alternative is to do the same but instead using an enum (I think it is not as good). A third alternative is to use the current pull request with a better name. >> >> What do you prefer? Do you have a better alternative? Do someone still think the current code is good? I think what we have today is inferior to all these improvements, and I would like to make it harder to develop bad test cases. > >> What do you prefer? Do you have a better alternative? Do someone still think the current code is good? I think what we have today is inferior to all these improvements, and I would like to make it harder to develop bad test ca > > The current API (name) is fine and fit for purpose; it does not promise or hide extra functionality under a simple name. > > There needs to be an explicit intention in the test(s) to support after the fact that arbitrary flags can be added. > @AlanBateman's proposal for naming [above](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/15452#issuecomment-1700459277) (or similar) would capture more clearly that test options are propagated to the child process. > Every test writer should be aware that additional command line options may be mixed in. > > There are many cases in which the ProcessTools APIs are not used to create child processes and do not need to be used in writing tests. They provide some convenience but also add a dependency and another API layer to work through in the case of failures. > > As far as I'm aware, there is no general guidance or design pattern outside of hotspot tests to propagate flags or use ProcessTools. Adding that as a requirement will need a different level of communication and change. @RogerRiggs You seem to know what you want w.r.t. the extra java doc comments. Could you help write those? Could we also do that as a separate RFE? I think that would make it easier to get this PR and the javadoc update through the door. ------------- PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15452#issuecomment-1778669353 From lkorinth at openjdk.org Wed Oct 25 08:44:29 2023 From: lkorinth at openjdk.org (Leo Korinth) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2023 08:44:29 GMT Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8315097: Rename createJavaProcessBuilder [v7] In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > This pull request renames `createJavaProcessBuilder` to `createLimitedTestJavaProcessBuilder` and renames `createTestJvm` to `createTestJavaProcessBuilder`. Both are implemented through a private `createJavaProcessBuilder`. It also updates the java doc. > > This is so that it should be harder to by mistake use `createLimitedTestJavaProcessBuilder` that is problematic because it will not forward JVM flags to the tested JVM. Leo Korinth has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision: fix copyright year and indentation ------------- Changes: - all: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15452/files - new: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15452/files/2f57a32d..4cc3865a Webrevs: - full: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=15452&range=06 - incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=15452&range=05-06 Stats: 23 lines in 1 file changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 23 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 rriggs at openjdk.org Wed Oct 25 22:00:31 2023 From: rriggs at openjdk.org (Roger Riggs) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2023 22:00:31 GMT Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8315097: Rename createJavaProcessBuilder [v7] In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, 25 Oct 2023 08:44:29 GMT, Leo Korinth wrote: >> This pull request renames `createJavaProcessBuilder` to `createLimitedTestJavaProcessBuilder` and renames `createTestJvm` to `createTestJavaProcessBuilder`. Both are implemented through a private `createJavaProcessBuilder`. It also updates the java doc. >> >> This is so that it should be harder to by mistake use `createLimitedTestJavaProcessBuilder` that is problematic because it will not forward JVM flags to the tested JVM. > > Leo Korinth has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision: > > fix copyright year and indentation Suggestions to complete the descriptions of the createXXXJavaProcessBuilder methods. test/lib/jdk/test/lib/process/ProcessTools.java line 505: > 503: * @return The ProcessBuilder instance representing the java command. > 504: */ > 505: public static ProcessBuilder createTestJavaProcessBuilder(List command) { Include the same description of other properties that are included in creating the ProcessBuilder... ``` * Unless the "test.noclasspath" property is "true" * the classpath property "java.class.path" is appended to the command line and * the environment of the ProcessBuilder is modified to remove "CLASSPATH". * If the property "test.thread.factory" is provided the command args are * updated and appended to invoke ProcessTools main() and provide the * name of the thread factory. * The "-Dtest.thread.factory" is appended to the arguments with the thread factory value. * The remaining command args are scanned for unsupported options and * are appended to the ProcessBuilder. test/lib/jdk/test/lib/process/ProcessTools.java line 520: > 518: * @return The ProcessBuilder instance representing the java command. > 519: */ > 520: public static ProcessBuilder createTestJavaProcessBuilder(String... command) { Include the same description of other properties that are included in creating the ProcessBuilder... * Unless the "test.noclasspath" property is "true" * the classpath property "java.class.path" is appended to the command line and * the environment of the ProcessBuilder is modified to remove "CLASSPATH". * If the property "test.thread.factory" is provided the command args are * updated and appended to invoke ProcessTools main() and provide the * name of the thread factory. * The "-Dtest.thread.factory" is appended to the arguments with the thread factory value. * The remaining command args are scanned for unsupported options and * are appended to the ProcessBuilder. test/lib/jdk/test/lib/process/ProcessTools.java line 538: > 536: * it in combination with @requires vm.flagless JTREG > 537: * anotation as to not waste energy and test resources. > 538: * Consider adding this description of what this method does. Suggestion: * Unless the "test.noclasspath" property is "true" * the classpath property "java.class.path" is appended to the command line and * the environment of the ProcessBuilder is modified to remove "CLASSPATH". * If the property "test.thread.factory" is provided the command args are * updated and appended to invoke ProcessTools main() and provide the * name of the thread factory. * The "-Dtest.thread.factory" is appended to the arguments with the thread factory value. * The remaining command args are scanned for unsupported options and * are appended to the ProcessBuilder. test/lib/jdk/test/lib/process/ProcessTools.java line 560: > 558: * it in combination with @requires vm.flagless JTREG > 559: * anotation as to not waste energy and test resources. > 560: * Suggestion: * Unless the "test.noclasspath" property is "true" * the classpath property "java.class.path" is appended to the command line and * the environment of the ProcessBuilder is modified to remove "CLASSPATH". * If the property "test.thread.factory" is provided the command args are * updated and appended to invoke ProcessTools main() and provide the * name of the thread factory. * The "-Dtest.thread.factory" is appended to the arguments with the thread factory value. * The remaining command args are scanned for unsupported options and * are appended to the ProcessBuilder. ------------- PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15452#pullrequestreview-1698308785 PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15452#discussion_r1372364800 PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15452#discussion_r1372364171 PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15452#discussion_r1372361862 PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15452#discussion_r1372362333 From lkorinth at openjdk.org Thu Oct 26 15:33:38 2023 From: lkorinth at openjdk.org (Leo Korinth) Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2023 15:33:38 GMT Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8315097: Rename createJavaProcessBuilder [v7] In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, 25 Oct 2023 08:44:29 GMT, Leo Korinth wrote: >> This pull request renames `createJavaProcessBuilder` to `createLimitedTestJavaProcessBuilder` and renames `createTestJvm` to `createTestJavaProcessBuilder`. Both are implemented through a private `createJavaProcessBuilder`. It also updates the java doc. >> >> This is so that it should be harder to by mistake use `createLimitedTestJavaProcessBuilder` that is problematic because it will not forward JVM flags to the tested JVM. > > Leo Korinth has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision: > > fix copyright year and indentation Would it be okay if we handle the new method documentation in a separate pull request? After applying your changes, I also noted that the existing description `The command line will be like: {test.jdk}/bin/java {test.vm.opts} {test.java.opts} cmds` is not only incorrect (or at least incomplete), but now also clashes with the added description. I then removed the sentence, but after I did that I also found out that similar wording exist in `executeTestJvm` and I fear that if I continue to pull strings, I will create more and more changes that you will have opinions on. Is it all right if we push what we have now, and that I create a new pull requests with these improvements in documentation that are actually not related to the changes in this pull request? ------------- PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15452#issuecomment-1781359450 From rriggs at openjdk.org Thu Oct 26 16:29:40 2023 From: rriggs at openjdk.org (Roger Riggs) Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2023 16:29:40 GMT Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8315097: Rename createJavaProcessBuilder [v7] In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, 25 Oct 2023 08:44:29 GMT, Leo Korinth wrote: >> This pull request renames `createJavaProcessBuilder` to `createLimitedTestJavaProcessBuilder` and renames `createTestJvm` to `createTestJavaProcessBuilder`. Both are implemented through a private `createJavaProcessBuilder`. It also updates the java doc. >> >> This is so that it should be harder to by mistake use `createLimitedTestJavaProcessBuilder` that is problematic because it will not forward JVM flags to the tested JVM. > > Leo Korinth has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision: > > fix copyright year and indentation ok, to correct the javadoc in a subsequent PR. ------------- Marked as reviewed by rriggs (Reviewer). PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15452#pullrequestreview-1700061972 From lkorinth at openjdk.org Fri Oct 27 08:50:47 2023 From: lkorinth at openjdk.org (Leo Korinth) Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2023 08:50:47 GMT Subject: jmx-dev Integrated: 8315097: Rename createJavaProcessBuilder In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, 28 Aug 2023 15:54:08 GMT, Leo Korinth wrote: > This pull request renames `createJavaProcessBuilder` to `createLimitedTestJavaProcessBuilder` and renames `createTestJvm` to `createTestJavaProcessBuilder`. Both are implemented through a private `createJavaProcessBuilder`. It also updates the java doc. > > This is so that it should be harder to by mistake use `createLimitedTestJavaProcessBuilder` that is problematic because it will not forward JVM flags to the tested JVM. This pull request has now been integrated. Changeset: d52a995f Author: Leo Korinth URL: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/commit/d52a995f35de26c2cc4074297a75141e4a363e1b Stats: 1574 lines in 560 files changed: 44 ins; 10 del; 1520 mod 8315097: Rename createJavaProcessBuilder Reviewed-by: lmesnik, dholmes, rriggs, stefank ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15452 From lkorinth at openjdk.org Fri Oct 27 09:00:48 2023 From: lkorinth at openjdk.org (Leo Korinth) Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2023 09:00:48 GMT Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8315097: Rename createJavaProcessBuilder [v7] In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, 25 Oct 2023 08:44:29 GMT, Leo Korinth wrote: >> This pull request renames `createJavaProcessBuilder` to `createLimitedTestJavaProcessBuilder` and renames `createTestJvm` to `createTestJavaProcessBuilder`. Both are implemented through a private `createJavaProcessBuilder`. It also updates the java doc. >> >> This is so that it should be harder to by mistake use `createLimitedTestJavaProcessBuilder` that is problematic because it will not forward JVM flags to the tested JVM. > > Leo Korinth has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision: > > fix copyright year and indentation Thanks, see: https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8318962 ------------- PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15452#issuecomment-1782552641