From syan at openjdk.org  Sun Feb 23 12:20:02 2025
From: syan at openjdk.org (SendaoYan)
Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2025 12:20:02 GMT
Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8350545: Several sun/management/jdp tests fails
 java.net.SocketException
Message-ID: <W6YRK1OCz5bYdl5z5ju2SzkNFt4lDNnAnMYQJApCAYw=.78276d1a-f154-43cb-aab0-c893bbd14209@github.com>

Hi all,

Four sun/management/jdp tests fails "java.net.SocketException: No such device" on some machines. The machine cannot connect to the Internet directly and needs to be connected to the Internet through a jump machine. The sun/management/jdp tests report "java.net.SocketException: No such device" failure do not caused by JVM bug but environmentalk issue, so this PR match the output and throw `jtreg.SkippedException` instead of report test fails.

Change has been verified locally, test-fix only and make tests more robustness, no risk.

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

Commit messages:
 - 8350545: Several sun/management/jdp tests fails java.net.SocketException

Changes: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/23738/files
  Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=23738&range=00
  Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8350545
  Stats: 13 lines in 5 files changed: 4 ins; 0 del; 9 mod
  Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/23738.diff
  Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/23738/head:pull/23738

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/23738

From alanb at openjdk.org  Sun Feb 23 12:50:06 2025
From: alanb at openjdk.org (Alan Bateman)
Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2025 12:50:06 GMT
Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8350545: Several sun/management/jdp tests fails
 java.net.SocketException
In-Reply-To: <W6YRK1OCz5bYdl5z5ju2SzkNFt4lDNnAnMYQJApCAYw=.78276d1a-f154-43cb-aab0-c893bbd14209@github.com>
References: <W6YRK1OCz5bYdl5z5ju2SzkNFt4lDNnAnMYQJApCAYw=.78276d1a-f154-43cb-aab0-c893bbd14209@github.com>
Message-ID: <4aYtU0MSCFd-32URhOyyhwoq_dKUqY10eGiEzV6oDLM=.8e8fde62-b9c6-4510-bb8e-18de975daa4e@github.com>

On Sun, 23 Feb 2025 12:15:13 GMT, SendaoYan <syan at openjdk.org> wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> Four sun/management/jdp tests fails "java.net.SocketException: No such device" on some machines. The machine cannot connect to the Internet directly and needs to be connected to the Internet through a jump machine. The sun/management/jdp tests report "java.net.SocketException: No such device" failure do not caused by JVM bug but environmentalk issue, so this PR match the output and throw `jtreg.SkippedException` instead of report test fails.
> 
> Change has been verified locally, test-fix only and make tests more robustness, no risk.

test/jdk/sun/management/jdp/DynamicLauncher.java line 66:

> 64:         if (output.contains("java.net.SocketException: No such device")) {
> 65:             throw new SkippedException("Network setup issue, skip this test");
> 66:         }

Something else isn't right if you are getting this error so I think further investigation is required to see if the issue is the test choosing the wrong interface or address, or a configuration issue on the test system.

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/23738#discussion_r1966769914

From syan at openjdk.org  Sun Feb 23 13:24:00 2025
From: syan at openjdk.org (SendaoYan)
Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2025 13:24:00 GMT
Subject: jmx-dev Withdrawn: 8350545: Several sun/management/jdp tests fails
 java.net.SocketException
In-Reply-To: <W6YRK1OCz5bYdl5z5ju2SzkNFt4lDNnAnMYQJApCAYw=.78276d1a-f154-43cb-aab0-c893bbd14209@github.com>
References: <W6YRK1OCz5bYdl5z5ju2SzkNFt4lDNnAnMYQJApCAYw=.78276d1a-f154-43cb-aab0-c893bbd14209@github.com>
Message-ID: <JYJR3HZfx84n3h82XjnQdkGGFILeE3m0KX6PkXIbhr4=.b4d6caf2-0ed3-4ab6-8941-1e8b1121a07d@github.com>

On Sun, 23 Feb 2025 12:15:13 GMT, SendaoYan <syan at openjdk.org> wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> Four sun/management/jdp tests fails "java.net.SocketException: No such device" on some machines. The machine cannot connect to the Internet directly and needs to be connected to the Internet through a jump machine. The sun/management/jdp tests report "java.net.SocketException: No such device" failure do not caused by JVM bug but environmentalk issue, so this PR match the output and throw `jtreg.SkippedException` instead of report test fails.
> 
> Change has been verified locally, test-fix only and make tests more robustness, no risk.

This pull request has been closed without being integrated.

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

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/23738

From syan at openjdk.org  Sun Feb 23 13:35:56 2025
From: syan at openjdk.org (SendaoYan)
Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2025 13:35:56 GMT
Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8350545: Several sun/management/jdp tests fails
 java.net.SocketException
In-Reply-To: <4aYtU0MSCFd-32URhOyyhwoq_dKUqY10eGiEzV6oDLM=.8e8fde62-b9c6-4510-bb8e-18de975daa4e@github.com>
References: <W6YRK1OCz5bYdl5z5ju2SzkNFt4lDNnAnMYQJApCAYw=.78276d1a-f154-43cb-aab0-c893bbd14209@github.com>
 <4aYtU0MSCFd-32URhOyyhwoq_dKUqY10eGiEzV6oDLM=.8e8fde62-b9c6-4510-bb8e-18de975daa4e@github.com>
Message-ID: <pMHWaPeYaTFK7mdhcB3q0wg4OUOb-9ZYZgcKSN_4L6I=.aac29057-aded-42a7-8383-3e0cd3a02c78@github.com>

On Sun, 23 Feb 2025 12:46:53 GMT, Alan Bateman <alanb at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Hi all,
>> 
>> Four sun/management/jdp tests fails "java.net.SocketException: No such device" on some machines. The machine cannot connect to the Internet directly and needs to be connected to the Internet through a jump machine. The sun/management/jdp tests report "java.net.SocketException: No such device" failure do not caused by JVM bug but environmentalk issue, so this PR match the output and throw `jtreg.SkippedException` instead of report test fails.
>> 
>> Change has been verified locally, test-fix only and make tests more robustness, no risk.
>
> test/jdk/sun/management/jdp/DynamicLauncher.java line 66:
> 
>> 64:         if (output.contains("java.net.SocketException: No such device")) {
>> 65:             throw new SkippedException("Network setup issue, skip this test");
>> 66:         }
> 
> Something else isn't right if you are getting this error so I think further investigation is required to see if the issue is the test choosing the wrong interface or address, or a configuration issue on the test system.

The tested address:port is hard code to '224.0.23.178:7095' by file test/jdk/sun/management/jdp/ClientConnection.java. This address:port work normally on most machines, but cannot work on machine which can not connect to the internet directly.

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/23738#discussion_r1966784435

From syan at openjdk.org  Mon Feb 24 10:02:52 2025
From: syan at openjdk.org (SendaoYan)
Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2025 10:02:52 GMT
Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8350545: Several sun/management/jdp tests fails
 java.net.SocketException
In-Reply-To: <pMHWaPeYaTFK7mdhcB3q0wg4OUOb-9ZYZgcKSN_4L6I=.aac29057-aded-42a7-8383-3e0cd3a02c78@github.com>
References: <W6YRK1OCz5bYdl5z5ju2SzkNFt4lDNnAnMYQJApCAYw=.78276d1a-f154-43cb-aab0-c893bbd14209@github.com>
 <4aYtU0MSCFd-32URhOyyhwoq_dKUqY10eGiEzV6oDLM=.8e8fde62-b9c6-4510-bb8e-18de975daa4e@github.com>
 <pMHWaPeYaTFK7mdhcB3q0wg4OUOb-9ZYZgcKSN_4L6I=.aac29057-aded-42a7-8383-3e0cd3a02c78@github.com>
Message-ID: <RPEI8NzqCDQRpe60_KfVNtcI__dgpE7wYuP8XCQEk9Y=.6fc99ec4-82a7-4102-a0b1-dc45c6edb594@github.com>

On Sun, 23 Feb 2025 13:31:00 GMT, SendaoYan <syan at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> test/jdk/sun/management/jdp/DynamicLauncher.java line 66:
>> 
>>> 64:         if (output.contains("java.net.SocketException: No such device")) {
>>> 65:             throw new SkippedException("Network setup issue, skip this test");
>>> 66:         }
>> 
>> Something else isn't right if you are getting this error so I think further investigation is required to see if the issue is the test choosing the wrong interface or address, or a configuration issue on the test system.
>
> The tested address:port is hard code to '224.0.23.178:7095' by file test/jdk/sun/management/jdp/ClientConnection.java. This address:port work normally on most machines, but cannot work on machine which can not connect to the internet directly.

Seems that the exception from src/java.base/unix/native/libnio/ch/Net.c:679.
I'm not familiar with jdp feature, Could you give me some advices how to make check is the test choosing the wrong interface or address.

The information test system which report test failure shows below:


> ifconfig 
enP2p129s0f1: flags=4163<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,MULTICAST>  mtu 1500
        inet 192.168.50.12  netmask 255.255.255.0  broadcast 192.168.50.255
        inet6 fe80::1163:1d10:87a:6be4  prefixlen 64  scopeid 0x20<link>
        ether a0:36:9f:53:17:f6  txqueuelen 1000  (Ethernet)
        RX packets 22678271  bytes 28824464370 (26.8 GiB)
        RX errors 0  dropped 0  overruns 0  frame 0
        TX packets 9400465  bytes 7501254087 (6.9 GiB)
        TX errors 0  dropped 0 overruns 0  carrier 0  collisions 0

lo: flags=73<UP,LOOPBACK,RUNNING>  mtu 65536
        inet 127.0.0.1  netmask 255.0.0.0
        inet6 ::1  prefixlen 128  scopeid 0x10<host>
        loop  txqueuelen 1000  (Local Loopback)
        RX packets 26485240  bytes 221859212049 (206.6 GiB)
        RX errors 0  dropped 0  overruns 0  frame 0
        TX packets 26485240  bytes 221859212049 (206.6 GiB)
        TX errors 0  dropped 0 overruns 0  carrier 0  collisions 0

> ip r
192.168.50.0/24 dev enP2p129s0f1 proto kernel scope link src 192.168.50.12 metric 100 


Command wget shows that it should connect internet through a jumper machine(192.168.50.1:10991):


> wget www.bing.com
--2025-02-24 17:56:25--  http://www.bing.com/
Connecting to 192.168.50.1:10991... connected.
Proxy request sent, awaiting response... 301 Moved Permanently
Location: http://cn.bing.com/ [following]
--2025-02-24 17:56:25--  http://cn.bing.com/
Reusing existing connection to 192.168.50.1:10991.
Proxy request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK
Length: 13006 (13K) [text/html]
Saving to: ?index.html?

index.html                                        100%[=============================================================================================================>]  12.70K  --.-KB/s    in 0s      

2025-02-24 17:56:25 (28.7 MB/s) - ?index.html? saved [13006/13006]

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/23738#discussion_r1967322056

From kevinw at openjdk.org  Mon Feb 24 11:45:05 2025
From: kevinw at openjdk.org (Kevin Walls)
Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2025 11:45:05 GMT
Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8350571: Remove mention of Tonga test suite from JMX
 tests
Message-ID: <f4Z5yQWmvQ0xSbqT83qymnHeS6YyBpkLLakh5BfXZz8=.e127dbce-6d73-407d-a77d-e4e428466dfd@github.com>

Trivial removal of confusing "Tonga" references in comments within a few JMX tests.

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

Commit messages:
 - 8350571: Remove mention of Tonga test suite from JMX tests

Changes: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/23747/files
  Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=23747&range=00
  Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8350571
  Stats: 27 lines in 5 files changed: 0 ins; 20 del; 7 mod
  Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/23747.diff
  Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/23747/head:pull/23747

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/23747

From cjplummer at openjdk.org  Mon Feb 24 19:21:52 2025
From: cjplummer at openjdk.org (Chris Plummer)
Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2025 19:21:52 GMT
Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8350571: Remove mention of Tonga test suite from
 JMX tests
In-Reply-To: <f4Z5yQWmvQ0xSbqT83qymnHeS6YyBpkLLakh5BfXZz8=.e127dbce-6d73-407d-a77d-e4e428466dfd@github.com>
References: <f4Z5yQWmvQ0xSbqT83qymnHeS6YyBpkLLakh5BfXZz8=.e127dbce-6d73-407d-a77d-e4e428466dfd@github.com>
Message-ID: <QWVsaClj1o7pXQ_7lNOIDIcWcQ9TweFTFNtInBL88tA=.37963343-689a-401b-9934-0f6571d732cd@github.com>

On Mon, 24 Feb 2025 11:40:03 GMT, Kevin Walls <kevinw at openjdk.org> wrote:

> Trivial removal of confusing "Tonga" references in comments within a few JMX tests.

Looks good. I'd like for @lmesnik to comment on this.

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

Marked as reviewed by cjplummer (Reviewer).

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/23747#pullrequestreview-2638207454

From lmesnik at openjdk.org  Mon Feb 24 20:55:52 2025
From: lmesnik at openjdk.org (Leonid Mesnik)
Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2025 20:55:52 GMT
Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8350571: Remove mention of Tonga test suite from
 JMX tests
In-Reply-To: <f4Z5yQWmvQ0xSbqT83qymnHeS6YyBpkLLakh5BfXZz8=.e127dbce-6d73-407d-a77d-e4e428466dfd@github.com>
References: <f4Z5yQWmvQ0xSbqT83qymnHeS6YyBpkLLakh5BfXZz8=.e127dbce-6d73-407d-a77d-e4e428466dfd@github.com>
Message-ID: <PA1a0wuLn0EVpPwIZN_Zl7fA1rZJ5_posVSqq7t0ZRI=.02c0ed34-ffc0-44e2-8322-665e130ed73e@github.com>

On Mon, 24 Feb 2025 11:40:03 GMT, Kevin Walls <kevinw at openjdk.org> wrote:

> Trivial removal of confusing "Tonga" references in comments within a few JMX tests.

Changes requested by lmesnik (Reviewer).

test/jdk/javax/management/MBeanServer/ExceptionTest.java line 227:

> 225:          * Reproduces the original parsing and collection of test parameters
> 226:          * from the DTonga JMX test suite.
> 227:          *

There are few similar methods
        static Map<String, Object> parseParameters(String args[])
in different Utils classes. 
Have you considered the removal of duplication code?
Also, the comment like 
" Reproduces the original parsing and collection of test parameters from legacy test suite"
might explain why this logic is needed. But it is up to you.

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

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/23747#pullrequestreview-2638415485
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/23747#discussion_r1968403429

From kevinw at openjdk.org  Mon Feb 24 21:32:02 2025
From: kevinw at openjdk.org (Kevin Walls)
Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2025 21:32:02 GMT
Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8350571: Remove mention of Tonga test suite from
 JMX tests
In-Reply-To: <PA1a0wuLn0EVpPwIZN_Zl7fA1rZJ5_posVSqq7t0ZRI=.02c0ed34-ffc0-44e2-8322-665e130ed73e@github.com>
References: <f4Z5yQWmvQ0xSbqT83qymnHeS6YyBpkLLakh5BfXZz8=.e127dbce-6d73-407d-a77d-e4e428466dfd@github.com>
 <PA1a0wuLn0EVpPwIZN_Zl7fA1rZJ5_posVSqq7t0ZRI=.02c0ed34-ffc0-44e2-8322-665e130ed73e@github.com>
Message-ID: <PDaz4s5MylQAL9IL8c4JdaNEGYIPuubY7N47rhzQuSs=.4a00e692-e7b8-44df-b925-e633da7d94be@github.com>

On Mon, 24 Feb 2025 20:53:10 GMT, Leonid Mesnik <lmesnik at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Trivial removal of confusing "Tonga" references in comments within a few JMX tests.
>
> test/jdk/javax/management/MBeanServer/ExceptionTest.java line 227:
> 
>> 225:          * Reproduces the original parsing and collection of test parameters
>> 226:          * from the DTonga JMX test suite.
>> 227:          *
> 
> There are few similar methods
>         static Map<String, Object> parseParameters(String args[])
> in different Utils classes. 
> Have you considered the removal of duplication code?
> Also, the comment like 
> " Reproduces the original parsing and collection of test parameters from legacy test suite"
> might explain why this logic is needed. But it is up to you.

Thanks -
For the paseParameters(arg) method, I think if I remove the reference to the mysterious legacy test suite, there is nothing left in that line worth saying.

The comment goes on to say "Collects passed args and returns them in a map..etc..." which seems worthwhile.

There probably is much further tidyup that we can do here, yes maybe the methods are the same, and maybe so may "Utils" classes is not great.  But I just wanted to remove this one point of confusion today!

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/23747#discussion_r1968442691

From lmesnik at openjdk.org  Mon Feb 24 21:36:54 2025
From: lmesnik at openjdk.org (Leonid Mesnik)
Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2025 21:36:54 GMT
Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8350571: Remove mention of Tonga test suite from
 JMX tests
In-Reply-To: <f4Z5yQWmvQ0xSbqT83qymnHeS6YyBpkLLakh5BfXZz8=.e127dbce-6d73-407d-a77d-e4e428466dfd@github.com>
References: <f4Z5yQWmvQ0xSbqT83qymnHeS6YyBpkLLakh5BfXZz8=.e127dbce-6d73-407d-a77d-e4e428466dfd@github.com>
Message-ID: <KlZGPCLPzIEcG6YGcBA5iQEwS3wvwosxe2BMAsUbXsk=.604f5eef-9dc0-4486-b705-d816e3c4884f@github.com>

On Mon, 24 Feb 2025 11:40:03 GMT, Kevin Walls <kevinw at openjdk.org> wrote:

> Trivial removal of confusing "Tonga" references in comments within a few JMX tests.

Marked as reviewed by lmesnik (Reviewer).

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

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/23747#pullrequestreview-2638493231

From lmesnik at openjdk.org  Mon Feb 24 21:36:56 2025
From: lmesnik at openjdk.org (Leonid Mesnik)
Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2025 21:36:56 GMT
Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8350571: Remove mention of Tonga test suite from
 JMX tests
In-Reply-To: <PDaz4s5MylQAL9IL8c4JdaNEGYIPuubY7N47rhzQuSs=.4a00e692-e7b8-44df-b925-e633da7d94be@github.com>
References: <f4Z5yQWmvQ0xSbqT83qymnHeS6YyBpkLLakh5BfXZz8=.e127dbce-6d73-407d-a77d-e4e428466dfd@github.com>
 <PA1a0wuLn0EVpPwIZN_Zl7fA1rZJ5_posVSqq7t0ZRI=.02c0ed34-ffc0-44e2-8322-665e130ed73e@github.com>
 <PDaz4s5MylQAL9IL8c4JdaNEGYIPuubY7N47rhzQuSs=.4a00e692-e7b8-44df-b925-e633da7d94be@github.com>
Message-ID: <v3CK4dDckXSofMRUh9Fs-KPFVj0Hz66u6SKARBvwSx0=.37a1d8b8-baaf-4de6-84b9-7b81dbf8866e@github.com>

On Mon, 24 Feb 2025 21:28:57 GMT, Kevin Walls <kevinw at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> test/jdk/javax/management/MBeanServer/ExceptionTest.java line 227:
>> 
>>> 225:          * Reproduces the original parsing and collection of test parameters
>>> 226:          * from the DTonga JMX test suite.
>>> 227:          *
>> 
>> There are few similar methods
>>         static Map<String, Object> parseParameters(String args[])
>> in different Utils classes. 
>> Have you considered the removal of duplication code?
>> Also, the comment like 
>> " Reproduces the original parsing and collection of test parameters from legacy test suite"
>> might explain why this logic is needed. But it is up to you.
>
> Thanks -
> For the paseParameters(arg) method, I think if I remove the reference to the mysterious legacy test suite, there is nothing left in that line worth saying.
> 
> The comment goes on to say "Collects passed args and returns them in a map..etc..." which seems worthwhile.
> 
> There probably is much further tidyup that we can do here, yes maybe the methods are the same, and maybe so may "Utils" classes is not great.  But I just wanted to remove this one point of confusion today!

The link to legacy is a just good explanation why this method is realized in such way. Like note, "There is might be no logic in this method, just legacy."

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/23747#discussion_r1968448707

From kevinw at openjdk.org  Mon Feb 24 21:48:53 2025
From: kevinw at openjdk.org (Kevin Walls)
Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2025 21:48:53 GMT
Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8350571: Remove mention of Tonga test suite from
 JMX tests
In-Reply-To: <v3CK4dDckXSofMRUh9Fs-KPFVj0Hz66u6SKARBvwSx0=.37a1d8b8-baaf-4de6-84b9-7b81dbf8866e@github.com>
References: <f4Z5yQWmvQ0xSbqT83qymnHeS6YyBpkLLakh5BfXZz8=.e127dbce-6d73-407d-a77d-e4e428466dfd@github.com>
 <PA1a0wuLn0EVpPwIZN_Zl7fA1rZJ5_posVSqq7t0ZRI=.02c0ed34-ffc0-44e2-8322-665e130ed73e@github.com>
 <PDaz4s5MylQAL9IL8c4JdaNEGYIPuubY7N47rhzQuSs=.4a00e692-e7b8-44df-b925-e633da7d94be@github.com>
 <v3CK4dDckXSofMRUh9Fs-KPFVj0Hz66u6SKARBvwSx0=.37a1d8b8-baaf-4de6-84b9-7b81dbf8866e@github.com>
Message-ID: <IrNLtzg-RdCJDDsDE0Z6B-Kg7g6OYiGIp_fZp4TN2xM=.a0b9cd51-2bc4-448f-921f-cbf6606871ae@github.com>

On Mon, 24 Feb 2025 21:34:41 GMT, Leonid Mesnik <lmesnik at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Thanks -
>> For the paseParameters(arg) method, I think if I remove the reference to the mysterious legacy test suite, there is nothing left in that line worth saying.
>> 
>> The comment goes on to say "Collects passed args and returns them in a map..etc..." which seems worthwhile.
>> 
>> There probably is much further tidyup that we can do here, yes maybe the methods are the same, and maybe so may "Utils" classes is not great.  But I just wanted to remove this one point of confusion today!
>
> The link to legacy is a just good explanation why this method is realized in such way. Like note, "There is might be no logic in this method, just legacy."

That's a bit harsh, I wasn't going to say there was no logic to this! 8-)
Code this old and quirky (and duplicated...) is kind of legacy by definition. 8-)

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/23747#discussion_r1968461046

From lmesnik at openjdk.org  Mon Feb 24 21:55:54 2025
From: lmesnik at openjdk.org (Leonid Mesnik)
Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2025 21:55:54 GMT
Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8350571: Remove mention of Tonga test suite from
 JMX tests
In-Reply-To: <IrNLtzg-RdCJDDsDE0Z6B-Kg7g6OYiGIp_fZp4TN2xM=.a0b9cd51-2bc4-448f-921f-cbf6606871ae@github.com>
References: <f4Z5yQWmvQ0xSbqT83qymnHeS6YyBpkLLakh5BfXZz8=.e127dbce-6d73-407d-a77d-e4e428466dfd@github.com>
 <PA1a0wuLn0EVpPwIZN_Zl7fA1rZJ5_posVSqq7t0ZRI=.02c0ed34-ffc0-44e2-8322-665e130ed73e@github.com>
 <PDaz4s5MylQAL9IL8c4JdaNEGYIPuubY7N47rhzQuSs=.4a00e692-e7b8-44df-b925-e633da7d94be@github.com>
 <v3CK4dDckXSofMRUh9Fs-KPFVj0Hz66u6SKARBvwSx0=.37a1d8b8-baaf-4de6-84b9-7b81dbf8866e@github.com>
 <IrNLtzg-RdCJDDsDE0Z6B-Kg7g6OYiGIp_fZp4TN2xM=.a0b9cd51-2bc4-448f-921f-cbf6606871ae@github.com>
Message-ID: <cXCJQZEdTwoIwh2pYkMwE6zsCI1DWsV_V6AX8JhyMOw=.a571ed08-5ee7-4f29-a81c-5ae77c8799ab@github.com>

On Mon, 24 Feb 2025 21:46:08 GMT, Kevin Walls <kevinw at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> The link to legacy is a just good explanation why this method is realized in such way. Like note, "There is might be no logic in this method, just legacy."
>
> That's a bit harsh, I wasn't going to say there was no logic to this! 8-)
> Code this old and quirky (and duplicated...) is kind of legacy by definition. 8-)

Yes, better to rewrite it of course, but now it becomes unclear why it was written at all.

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/23747#discussion_r1968469210

From kevinw at openjdk.org  Mon Feb 24 22:02:55 2025
From: kevinw at openjdk.org (Kevin Walls)
Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2025 22:02:55 GMT
Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8350571: Remove mention of Tonga test suite from
 JMX tests
In-Reply-To: <f4Z5yQWmvQ0xSbqT83qymnHeS6YyBpkLLakh5BfXZz8=.e127dbce-6d73-407d-a77d-e4e428466dfd@github.com>
References: <f4Z5yQWmvQ0xSbqT83qymnHeS6YyBpkLLakh5BfXZz8=.e127dbce-6d73-407d-a77d-e4e428466dfd@github.com>
Message-ID: <aBq2NBxzvO7lFWIa-3U95Mq1ANGX-TLzjwb3E8_svjA=.6ae784d3-0ff3-4fbe-b273-03a58c5843e2@github.com>

On Mon, 24 Feb 2025 11:40:03 GMT, Kevin Walls <kevinw at openjdk.org> wrote:

> Trivial removal of confusing "Tonga" references in comments within a few JMX tests.

Thanks for the reviews!

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

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/23747#issuecomment-2679752104

From kevinw at openjdk.org  Mon Feb 24 22:02:56 2025
From: kevinw at openjdk.org (Kevin Walls)
Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2025 22:02:56 GMT
Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8350571: Remove mention of Tonga test suite from
 JMX tests
In-Reply-To: <cXCJQZEdTwoIwh2pYkMwE6zsCI1DWsV_V6AX8JhyMOw=.a571ed08-5ee7-4f29-a81c-5ae77c8799ab@github.com>
References: <f4Z5yQWmvQ0xSbqT83qymnHeS6YyBpkLLakh5BfXZz8=.e127dbce-6d73-407d-a77d-e4e428466dfd@github.com>
 <PA1a0wuLn0EVpPwIZN_Zl7fA1rZJ5_posVSqq7t0ZRI=.02c0ed34-ffc0-44e2-8322-665e130ed73e@github.com>
 <PDaz4s5MylQAL9IL8c4JdaNEGYIPuubY7N47rhzQuSs=.4a00e692-e7b8-44df-b925-e633da7d94be@github.com>
 <v3CK4dDckXSofMRUh9Fs-KPFVj0Hz66u6SKARBvwSx0=.37a1d8b8-baaf-4de6-84b9-7b81dbf8866e@github.com>
 <IrNLtzg-RdCJDDsDE0Z6B-Kg7g6OYiGIp_fZp4TN2xM=.a0b9cd51-2bc4-448f-921f-cbf6606871ae@github.com>
 <cXCJQZEdTwoIwh2pYkMwE6zsCI1DWsV_V6AX8JhyMOw=.a571ed08-5ee7-4f29-a81c-5ae77c8799ab@github.com>
Message-ID: <CBool9UaXs5HnlU8-2D2wyacTex8wbEVWzbKapPdlkE=.ffa20027-f83a-4554-ab7e-97e706c4dc1e@github.com>

On Mon, 24 Feb 2025 21:53:24 GMT, Leonid Mesnik <lmesnik at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> That's a bit harsh, I wasn't going to say there was no logic to this! 8-)
>> Code this old and quirky (and duplicated...) is kind of legacy by definition. 8-)
>
> Yes, better to rewrite it of course, but now it becomes unclear why it was written at all.

I will go with this change for now, maybe we can come back here!

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/23747#discussion_r1968476603

From sspitsyn at openjdk.org  Mon Feb 24 22:54:56 2025
From: sspitsyn at openjdk.org (Serguei Spitsyn)
Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2025 22:54:56 GMT
Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8350571: Remove mention of Tonga test suite from
 JMX tests
In-Reply-To: <f4Z5yQWmvQ0xSbqT83qymnHeS6YyBpkLLakh5BfXZz8=.e127dbce-6d73-407d-a77d-e4e428466dfd@github.com>
References: <f4Z5yQWmvQ0xSbqT83qymnHeS6YyBpkLLakh5BfXZz8=.e127dbce-6d73-407d-a77d-e4e428466dfd@github.com>
Message-ID: <8MUZf1VSJtsosbJf34azIYpMFtRUSDOafdXI9IoAaL0=.92773edb-0fbc-4924-b5cd-ac7bce1afb08@github.com>

On Mon, 24 Feb 2025 11:40:03 GMT, Kevin Walls <kevinw at openjdk.org> wrote:

> Trivial removal of confusing "Tonga" references in comments within a few JMX tests.

Marked as reviewed by sspitsyn (Reviewer).

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

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/23747#pullrequestreview-2638631761

From kevinw at openjdk.org  Tue Feb 25 12:57:01 2025
From: kevinw at openjdk.org (Kevin Walls)
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2025 12:57:01 GMT
Subject: jmx-dev Integrated: 8350571: Remove mention of Tonga test suite
 from JMX tests
In-Reply-To: <f4Z5yQWmvQ0xSbqT83qymnHeS6YyBpkLLakh5BfXZz8=.e127dbce-6d73-407d-a77d-e4e428466dfd@github.com>
References: <f4Z5yQWmvQ0xSbqT83qymnHeS6YyBpkLLakh5BfXZz8=.e127dbce-6d73-407d-a77d-e4e428466dfd@github.com>
Message-ID: <be4lAM-LfOs6ymXCcZvFPG761-rBGcIfrwAJ-LGZap4=.d325bde7-882d-4833-b5b0-00971ddfeb0f@github.com>

On Mon, 24 Feb 2025 11:40:03 GMT, Kevin Walls <kevinw at openjdk.org> wrote:

> Trivial removal of confusing "Tonga" references in comments within a few JMX tests.

This pull request has now been integrated.

Changeset: 8cfebc41
Author:    Kevin Walls <kevinw at openjdk.org>
URL:       https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/commit/8cfebc41dc8ec7b0d24d9c467b91de82d28b73fc
Stats:     27 lines in 5 files changed: 0 ins; 20 del; 7 mod

8350571: Remove mention of Tonga test suite from JMX tests

Reviewed-by: cjplummer, lmesnik, sspitsyn

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

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/23747

From syan at openjdk.org  Wed Feb 26 01:44:55 2025
From: syan at openjdk.org (SendaoYan)
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2025 01:44:55 GMT
Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8350545: Several sun/management/jdp tests fails
 java.net.SocketException
In-Reply-To: <RPEI8NzqCDQRpe60_KfVNtcI__dgpE7wYuP8XCQEk9Y=.6fc99ec4-82a7-4102-a0b1-dc45c6edb594@github.com>
References: <W6YRK1OCz5bYdl5z5ju2SzkNFt4lDNnAnMYQJApCAYw=.78276d1a-f154-43cb-aab0-c893bbd14209@github.com>
 <4aYtU0MSCFd-32URhOyyhwoq_dKUqY10eGiEzV6oDLM=.8e8fde62-b9c6-4510-bb8e-18de975daa4e@github.com>
 <pMHWaPeYaTFK7mdhcB3q0wg4OUOb-9ZYZgcKSN_4L6I=.aac29057-aded-42a7-8383-3e0cd3a02c78@github.com>
 <RPEI8NzqCDQRpe60_KfVNtcI__dgpE7wYuP8XCQEk9Y=.6fc99ec4-82a7-4102-a0b1-dc45c6edb594@github.com>
Message-ID: <wo2S-uQGqnCwXze_ku_NSnCNuPlPVo5iXNavnGkr9Pc=.355cc4a3-4faa-4c08-a572-2d97e063481c@github.com>

On Mon, 24 Feb 2025 09:58:47 GMT, SendaoYan <syan at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> The tested address:port is hard code to '224.0.23.178:7095' by file test/jdk/sun/management/jdp/ClientConnection.java. This address:port work normally on most machines, but cannot work on machine which can not connect to the internet directly.
>
> Seems that the exception from src/java.base/unix/native/libnio/ch/Net.c:679.
> I'm not familiar with jdp feature, Could you give me some advices how to make check is the test choosing the wrong interface or address.
> 
> The information test system which report test failure shows below:
> 
> 
>> ifconfig 
> enP2p129s0f1: flags=4163<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,MULTICAST>  mtu 1500
>         inet 192.168.50.12  netmask 255.255.255.0  broadcast 192.168.50.255
>         inet6 fe80::1163:1d10:87a:6be4  prefixlen 64  scopeid 0x20<link>
>         ether a0:36:9f:53:17:f6  txqueuelen 1000  (Ethernet)
>         RX packets 22678271  bytes 28824464370 (26.8 GiB)
>         RX errors 0  dropped 0  overruns 0  frame 0
>         TX packets 9400465  bytes 7501254087 (6.9 GiB)
>         TX errors 0  dropped 0 overruns 0  carrier 0  collisions 0
> 
> lo: flags=73<UP,LOOPBACK,RUNNING>  mtu 65536
>         inet 127.0.0.1  netmask 255.0.0.0
>         inet6 ::1  prefixlen 128  scopeid 0x10<host>
>         loop  txqueuelen 1000  (Local Loopback)
>         RX packets 26485240  bytes 221859212049 (206.6 GiB)
>         RX errors 0  dropped 0  overruns 0  frame 0
>         TX packets 26485240  bytes 221859212049 (206.6 GiB)
>         TX errors 0  dropped 0 overruns 0  carrier 0  collisions 0
> 
>> ip r
> 192.168.50.0/24 dev enP2p129s0f1 proto kernel scope link src 192.168.50.12 metric 100 
> 
> 
> Command wget shows that it should connect to internet through a jumper machine(192.168.50.1:10991):
> 
> 
>> wget www.bing.com
> --2025-02-24 17:56:25--  http://www.bing.com/
> Connecting to 192.168.50.1:10991... connected.
> Proxy request sent, awaiting response... 301 Moved Permanently
> Location: http://cn.bing.com/ [following]
> --2025-02-24 17:56:25--  http://cn.bing.com/
> Reusing existing connection to 192.168.50.1:10991.
> Proxy request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK
> Length: 13006 (13K) [text/html]
> Saving to: ?index.html?
> 
> index.html                                        100%[=============================================================================================================>]  12.70K  --.-KB/s    in 0s      
> 
> 2025-02-24 17:56:25 (28.7 MB/s) - ?index.html? saved [13006/13006]

The test test/jdk/com/sun/jndi/ldap/LdapPoolTimeoutTest.java will report "MSG RTE: javax.naming.CommunicationException: example.com:1234 [Root exception is java.net.UnknownHostException: example.com]" failure on the same machine. If I add argument " -Dhttp.proxyHost=192.168.50.1 -Dhttp.proxyPort=10991 -Dhttps.proxyHost=192.168.50.1 -Dhttps.proxyPort=10991 -DsocksProxyHost=192.168.50.1 -DsocksProxyPort=10991" to jtreg, this test will run passes. Maybe we need to investigate why the proxy do not work for sun/management/jdp tests.

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/23738#discussion_r1970775057

From lmesnik at openjdk.org  Fri Feb 28 00:09:31 2025
From: lmesnik at openjdk.org (Leonid Mesnik)
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2025 00:09:31 GMT
Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8350820: The OperatingSystemMXBean cpuLoad() methods
 return -1.0 in Windows
Message-ID: <_XIjKdfr3v2O7Wl2A6TsMkxVFSHb4jKZAUcprMSJX70=.0ea99a79-9ea7-4704-af56-51fa8651dd20@github.com>

The problem was introduced by the 
https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8336289

This pr just revert changes in src/jdk.management/windows/native/libmanagement_ext/OperatingSystemImpl.c

The test fix is going to be pushed separately (for easy backporting) bug https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8350818

I verified that updated tests failed (bean returns -1.0) and now passed, also run tier1-5 testing.

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

Commit messages:
 - 8350820

Changes: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/23832/files
  Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=23832&range=00
  Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8350820
  Stats: 30 lines in 1 file changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 30 mod
  Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/23832.diff
  Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/23832/head:pull/23832

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/23832

From lmesnik at openjdk.org  Fri Feb 28 00:10:42 2025
From: lmesnik at openjdk.org (Leonid Mesnik)
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2025 00:10:42 GMT
Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8350818: Improve OperatingSystemMXBean cpu load tests
 to don't accept -1.0 by default
Message-ID: <QXfJ9-t68HurGLxlrnbrNGALIn6h_JnTvRV79qrLXLk=.74d8d939-b422-46ce-8200-3e5f1218a11f@github.com>

The cpuLoad tests were updated to fail if -1.0 returns to catch bugs like https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8350820

The -1.0 means that JDK can't obtain cpu load. It shouldn't be returned.
If this functionality doesn't work on certain configurations then they should be excluded.

The fix should be pushed after https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8350820
I filed separate PR to backport fix easier.
Also, I haven't changed indentation and didn't change getSystemCpuLoad to getCpuLoad. They return same. 
Might be it would be better. just to rename the whole test later.

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

Commit messages:
 - testfix

Changes: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/23833/files
  Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=23833&range=00
  Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8350818
  Stats: 5 lines in 2 files changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 5 mod
  Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/23833.diff
  Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/23833/head:pull/23833

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/23833

From kevinw at openjdk.org  Fri Feb 28 09:39:52 2025
From: kevinw at openjdk.org (Kevin Walls)
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2025 09:39:52 GMT
Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8350820: The OperatingSystemMXBean cpuLoad()
 methods return -1.0 in Windows
In-Reply-To: <_XIjKdfr3v2O7Wl2A6TsMkxVFSHb4jKZAUcprMSJX70=.0ea99a79-9ea7-4704-af56-51fa8651dd20@github.com>
References: <_XIjKdfr3v2O7Wl2A6TsMkxVFSHb4jKZAUcprMSJX70=.0ea99a79-9ea7-4704-af56-51fa8651dd20@github.com>
Message-ID: <WV4IhEjvgTQxFJkNSnTH7K1_Vht-v_Nfonu00hgBCeE=.34610560-5c86-4845-9da0-cf65b012cd6c@github.com>

On Thu, 27 Feb 2025 23:23:07 GMT, Leonid Mesnik <lmesnik at openjdk.org> wrote:

> The problem was introduced by the 
> https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8336289
> 
> This pr just revert changes in src/jdk.management/windows/native/libmanagement_ext/OperatingSystemImpl.c
> 
> The test fix is going to be pushed separately (for easy backporting) bug https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8350818
> 
> I verified that updated tests failed (bean returns -1.0) and now passed, also run tier1-5 testing.

Yes this looks good.  I also built and verified in JConsole we get good data from the cpu usage monitors.

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

Marked as reviewed by kevinw (Reviewer).

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/23832#pullrequestreview-2650240621

From kevinw at openjdk.org  Fri Feb 28 09:52:01 2025
From: kevinw at openjdk.org (Kevin Walls)
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2025 09:52:01 GMT
Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8350818: Improve OperatingSystemMXBean cpu load
 tests to don't accept -1.0 by default
In-Reply-To: <QXfJ9-t68HurGLxlrnbrNGALIn6h_JnTvRV79qrLXLk=.74d8d939-b422-46ce-8200-3e5f1218a11f@github.com>
References: <QXfJ9-t68HurGLxlrnbrNGALIn6h_JnTvRV79qrLXLk=.74d8d939-b422-46ce-8200-3e5f1218a11f@github.com>
Message-ID: <UsF1lfUyOnKi-8b95UBa-DbyhvnXziPz5w87ekXMZh0=.130522fa-ad78-4ef7-ad30-da35938ac21f@github.com>

On Fri, 28 Feb 2025 00:05:23 GMT, Leonid Mesnik <lmesnik at openjdk.org> wrote:

> The cpuLoad tests were updated to fail if -1.0 returns to catch bugs like https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8350820
> 
> The -1.0 means that JDK can't obtain cpu load. It shouldn't be returned.
> If this functionality doesn't work on certain configurations then they should be excluded.
> 
> The fix should be pushed after https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8350820
> I filed separate PR to backport fix easier.
> Also, I haven't changed indentation and didn't change getSystemCpuLoad to getCpuLoad. They return same. 
> Might be it would be better. just to rename the whole test later.

Looks good, yes ignoring the -1 seems like a historical issue, maybe we had platforms or builds where -1 was expected.  Yes we can exclude the test if we find such configs.

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

Marked as reviewed by kevinw (Reviewer).

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/23833#pullrequestreview-2650269373

From jwaters at openjdk.org  Fri Feb 28 12:05:52 2025
From: jwaters at openjdk.org (Julian Waters)
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2025 12:05:52 GMT
Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8350820: The OperatingSystemMXBean cpuLoad()
 methods return -1.0 in Windows
In-Reply-To: <_XIjKdfr3v2O7Wl2A6TsMkxVFSHb4jKZAUcprMSJX70=.0ea99a79-9ea7-4704-af56-51fa8651dd20@github.com>
References: <_XIjKdfr3v2O7Wl2A6TsMkxVFSHb4jKZAUcprMSJX70=.0ea99a79-9ea7-4704-af56-51fa8651dd20@github.com>
Message-ID: <mhkQk8YzI5NCfmceu9p2_OUrVk6RDy8g-_0J-emoX6I=.f0ff98b0-296f-4117-a227-1df611ed4c1d@github.com>

On Thu, 27 Feb 2025 23:23:07 GMT, Leonid Mesnik <lmesnik at openjdk.org> wrote:

> The problem was introduced by the 
> https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8336289
> 
> This pr just revert changes in src/jdk.management/windows/native/libmanagement_ext/OperatingSystemImpl.c
> 
> The test fix is going to be pushed separately (for easy backporting) bug https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8350818
> 
> I verified that updated tests failed (bean returns -1.0) and now passed, also run tier1-5 testing.

Hopefully the standard snprintf can be reinstated in a fix quickly after this one

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

Marked as reviewed by jwaters (Committer).

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/23832#pullrequestreview-2650552996

From kevinw at openjdk.org  Fri Feb 28 18:11:10 2025
From: kevinw at openjdk.org (Kevin Walls)
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2025 18:11:10 GMT
Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8350820: OperatingSystemMXBean CpuLoad() methods
 return -1.0 on Windows
In-Reply-To: <_XIjKdfr3v2O7Wl2A6TsMkxVFSHb4jKZAUcprMSJX70=.0ea99a79-9ea7-4704-af56-51fa8651dd20@github.com>
References: <_XIjKdfr3v2O7Wl2A6TsMkxVFSHb4jKZAUcprMSJX70=.0ea99a79-9ea7-4704-af56-51fa8651dd20@github.com>
Message-ID: <jE64zpH0naQB9W6I9c8odC6USaWQRTxSremq0vj3qP4=.508c2bed-8e8c-4a0d-a137-4b0af0b6dc91@github.com>

On Thu, 27 Feb 2025 23:23:07 GMT, Leonid Mesnik <lmesnik at openjdk.org> wrote:

> The problem was introduced by the 
> https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8336289
> 
> This pr just revert changes in src/jdk.management/windows/native/libmanagement_ext/OperatingSystemImpl.c
> 
> The test fix is going to be pushed separately (for easy backporting) bug https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8350818
> 
> I verified that updated tests failed (bean returns -1.0) and now passed, also run tier1-5 testing.

This should be a trivial change.  It is a simple backout.
We have both done some testing.

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

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/23832#issuecomment-2691260522

From duke at openjdk.org  Fri Feb 28 18:11:07 2025
From: duke at openjdk.org (Abdelhak Zaaim)
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2025 18:11:07 GMT
Subject: jmx-dev RFR: 8350818: Improve OperatingSystemMXBean cpu load
 tests to not accept -1.0 by default
In-Reply-To: <QXfJ9-t68HurGLxlrnbrNGALIn6h_JnTvRV79qrLXLk=.74d8d939-b422-46ce-8200-3e5f1218a11f@github.com>
References: <QXfJ9-t68HurGLxlrnbrNGALIn6h_JnTvRV79qrLXLk=.74d8d939-b422-46ce-8200-3e5f1218a11f@github.com>
Message-ID: <hQuiweTE1xfcMJz3vHmtzPmswl2qp-gvamOIRSbLQ3k=.96d1632e-62e1-4417-ba32-adf97260c003@github.com>

On Fri, 28 Feb 2025 00:05:23 GMT, Leonid Mesnik <lmesnik at openjdk.org> wrote:

> The cpuLoad tests were updated to fail if -1.0 returns to catch bugs like https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8350820
> 
> The -1.0 means that JDK can't obtain cpu load. It shouldn't be returned.
> If this functionality doesn't work on certain configurations then they should be excluded.
> 
> The fix should be pushed after https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8350820
> I filed separate PR to backport fix easier.
> Also, I haven't changed indentation and didn't change getSystemCpuLoad to getCpuLoad. They return same. 
> Might be it would be better. just to rename the whole test later.

Marked as reviewed by abdelhak-zaaim at github.com (no known OpenJDK username).

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

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/23833#pullrequestreview-2651479664

From lmesnik at openjdk.org  Fri Feb 28 18:16:59 2025
From: lmesnik at openjdk.org (Leonid Mesnik)
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2025 18:16:59 GMT
Subject: jmx-dev Integrated: 8350820: OperatingSystemMXBean CpuLoad()
 methods return -1.0 on Windows
In-Reply-To: <_XIjKdfr3v2O7Wl2A6TsMkxVFSHb4jKZAUcprMSJX70=.0ea99a79-9ea7-4704-af56-51fa8651dd20@github.com>
References: <_XIjKdfr3v2O7Wl2A6TsMkxVFSHb4jKZAUcprMSJX70=.0ea99a79-9ea7-4704-af56-51fa8651dd20@github.com>
Message-ID: <3ItEZBRMJOjPnEIeXNXN3cYGFtH6Xvk7EQmIaMWhFsc=.2b22b0d2-e465-43ed-b92f-901c247b7135@github.com>

On Thu, 27 Feb 2025 23:23:07 GMT, Leonid Mesnik <lmesnik at openjdk.org> wrote:

> The problem was introduced by the 
> https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8336289
> 
> This pr just revert changes in src/jdk.management/windows/native/libmanagement_ext/OperatingSystemImpl.c
> 
> The test fix is going to be pushed separately (for easy backporting) bug https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8350818
> 
> I verified that updated tests failed (bean returns -1.0) and now passed, also run tier1-5 testing.

This pull request has now been integrated.

Changeset: 197004f4
Author:    Leonid Mesnik <lmesnik at openjdk.org>
URL:       https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/commit/197004f4c621d7ab4c8b9e48362973eaa18156a4
Stats:     30 lines in 1 file changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 30 mod

8350820: OperatingSystemMXBean CpuLoad() methods return -1.0 on Windows

Reviewed-by: kevinw, jwaters

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

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/23832

From lmesnik at openjdk.org  Fri Feb 28 22:40:56 2025
From: lmesnik at openjdk.org (Leonid Mesnik)
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2025 22:40:56 GMT
Subject: jmx-dev Integrated: 8350818: Improve OperatingSystemMXBean cpu load
 tests to not accept -1.0 by default
In-Reply-To: <QXfJ9-t68HurGLxlrnbrNGALIn6h_JnTvRV79qrLXLk=.74d8d939-b422-46ce-8200-3e5f1218a11f@github.com>
References: <QXfJ9-t68HurGLxlrnbrNGALIn6h_JnTvRV79qrLXLk=.74d8d939-b422-46ce-8200-3e5f1218a11f@github.com>
Message-ID: <bM76JPEHqqsGvm2wZZCql9r9g3NW_hgvWA42wCluawY=.7af00f62-b4cb-4301-a7aa-112e7530d78e@github.com>

On Fri, 28 Feb 2025 00:05:23 GMT, Leonid Mesnik <lmesnik at openjdk.org> wrote:

> The cpuLoad tests were updated to fail if -1.0 returns to catch bugs like https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8350820
> 
> The -1.0 means that JDK can't obtain cpu load. It shouldn't be returned.
> If this functionality doesn't work on certain configurations then they should be excluded.
> 
> The fix should be pushed after https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8350820
> I filed separate PR to backport fix easier.
> Also, I haven't changed indentation and didn't change getSystemCpuLoad to getCpuLoad. They return same. 
> Might be it would be better. just to rename the whole test later.

This pull request has now been integrated.

Changeset: 3c72c04d
Author:    Leonid Mesnik <lmesnik at openjdk.org>
URL:       https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/commit/3c72c04de7a43d265dae7160fe53baaaa8ae6f73
Stats:     5 lines in 2 files changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 5 mod

8350818: Improve OperatingSystemMXBean cpu load tests to not accept -1.0 by default

Reviewed-by: kevinw

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

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/23833