RFR: 8260555: Change the default TIMEOUT_FACTOR from 4 to 1 [v3]
SendaoYan
syan at openjdk.org
Thu Aug 21 09:52:54 UTC 2025
On Thu, 21 Aug 2025 09:10:26 GMT, Leo Korinth <lkorinth at openjdk.org> wrote:
>> Yes, this PR change the default timeoutFactor when the tested JVM options do not contains '-Xcomp', and at the same time also multiplies 4 of the timeout value defined in some tests.
>>
>> So after this PR, the tests which the timeout value has been multiplied 4 will have more timeout value, when the tested [JVM options contains '-Xcomp'](https://github.com/lkorinth/jdk/blob/286a2cc6e989a1c7dcd641bce792c6411bc1d0ea/make/RunTests.gmk#L593).
>>
>> I do agree this change, what I mean is this change has some side effect.
>>
>>> If you would like to change it after the integration I think that would be valuable --- though my guess is that it could be quite a lot of work.
>>
>> I think I can try it in a new PR.
>
> I want to _warn_ you before you put too much energy into it. Changing the `-Xcomp` timeout factor might have even bigger impact than my change. Also, I have no idea how well that flag is tested in open testing. That is, your change might look good for you --- but might cause havoc for companies doing more extensive testing.
>
> I have still not received green light for integrating my change, because extensive testing is still being run (and other teams are evaluating). I advise against changing the flag. When I evaluate the benefit for the default timeout, it was mainly not the timeout _in itself_ that was the problem, but the fact that most people have no idea that the timeout factor is applied and thus can not create or debug tests in a good way. I hope this helps you, and does not come out as too negative. I just feel that I have put too much energy into this, and I do not hope that struggle for you.
@lkorinth Thanks for your advice sincerely. I think you are right, we need more evaluate cautiously before start to change the timeoutFactor for -Xcomp.
-------------
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/26749#discussion_r2290523415
More information about the nio-dev
mailing list