RFR: 7903781: Report the process id of the agent or other VM that was used for a jtreg action [v2]

[Jonathan Gibbons]

On Fri, 26 Jul 2024 06:54:56 GMT, Jaikiran Pai <jpai at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Can I please get a review of this change which proposes to repor the process id of the process that was used to run a jtreg action? This change addresses https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/CODETOOLS-7903781.
>> 
>> As noted in that linked enhancement request, this change will report the process id  the `section` messages of each action. This will now look like:
>> 
>> 
>> #section:compile
>> ----------messages:(7/297)----------
>> command: compile test/streams/FileDescriptorTest.java
>> reason: .class file out of date or does not exist
>> started: Fri Jul 26 00:56:01 UTC 2024
>> Mode: othervm
>> Process id: 88469
>> finished: Fri Jul 26 00:56:01 UTC 2024
>> elapsed time (seconds): 0.254
>> 
>> ....
>> 
>> #section:main
>> ----------messages:(7/232)----------
>> command: main FileDescriptorTest
>> reason: User specified action: run main FileDescriptorTest 
>> started: Fri Jul 26 00:56:01 UTC 2024
>> Mode: othervm
>> Process id: 88470
>> finished: Fri Jul 26 00:56:01 UTC 2024
>> elapsed time (seconds): 0.042
>> 
>> Notice the new "Process id: ..." line in those sections.
>
> Jaikiran Pai has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
> 
>   include a self test for verifying the process id in the generated report

src/share/classes/com/sun/javatest/regtest/util/ProcessUtils.java line 38:

> 36: 
> 37:     private static final Method destroyForciblyMethod;
> 38:     private static final Method PID_METHOD;

How much we we still need reflective access to these methods?  
If they are only invoked from the `jtreg` tool (and never from a test VM), then the minimum level of JDK required to run `jtreg` is currently 11, right? And, we no longer support running test-VM code on anything less than 8, right?

So, at some level, it seems we may not need `ProcessUtils` any more -- unless maybe as a convenience wrapper.

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jtreg/pull/215#discussion_r1719089548