jtreg test test java/lang/ClassLoader/nativeLibrary/NativeLibraryTest.java

[Siebenborn, Axel]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mikael Vidstedt [mailto:mikael.vidstedt at oracle.com]
> 
> Thanks for adding the comment. I’m curious, what was the reason for adding
> it as a separate block? Does it mess up for jtreg to have it next to the
> @requires itself in some way?

I wasn't sure where to add the add the comment. So, I just looked at other tests 
and the only comments to an '@require' I found, were made this way.
 
> 
> Cheers,
> Mikael
> 
> > On Apr 19, 2018, at 2:05 AM, Siebenborn, Axel
> <axel.siebenborn at sap.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> > I added a comment and updated the webrev:
> >
> > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~asiebenborn/require_musl/webrev_run_time
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Axel
> >
> >
> > From: Mikael Vidstedt [mailto:mikael.vidstedt at oracle.com]
> > Sent: Dienstag, 17. April 2018 19:25
> > To: Siebenborn, Axel <axel.siebenborn at sap.com>
> > Cc: David Holmes <david.holmes at oracle.com>; portola-
> dev at openjdk.java.net
> > Subject: Re: jtreg test test
> java/lang/ClassLoader/nativeLibrary/NativeLibraryTest.java
> >
> >
> > Looks good. Maybe a short comment about why the test is not run on
> musl?
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Mikael
> >
> > On Apr 12, 2018, at 7:33 AM, Siebenborn, Axel
> <mailto:axel.siebenborn at sap.com> wrote:
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: David Holmes [mailto:david.holmes at oracle.com]
> > Sent: Donnerstag, 12. April 2018 14:17
> > To: Siebenborn, Axel <mailto:axel.siebenborn at sap.com>; portola-
> > mailto:dev at openjdk.java.net
> > Subject: Re: jtreg test test
> > java/lang/ClassLoader/nativeLibrary/NativeLibraryTest.java
> >
> > On 12/04/2018 9:34 PM, Siebenborn, Axel wrote:
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: portola-dev [mailto:portola-dev-bounces at openjdk.java.net] On
> > Behalf Of Siebenborn, Axel
> > Sent: Donnerstag, 12. April 2018 13:30
> > To: David Holmes <mailto:david.holmes at oracle.com>; portola-
> > mailto:dev at openjdk.java.net
> > Subject: [CAUTION] RE: jtreg test test
> > java/lang/ClassLoader/nativeLibrary/NativeLibraryTest.java
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: David Holmes [mailto:david.holmes at oracle.com]
> > Sent: Donnerstag, 12. April 2018 12:54
> > To: Siebenborn, Axel <axel.siebenborn at sap.com>; portola-
> > dev at openjdk.java.net
> > Subject: Re: jtreg test test
> > java/lang/ClassLoader/nativeLibrary/NativeLibraryTest.java
> >
> > On 12/04/2018 8:12 PM, Siebenborn, Axel wrote:
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: David Holmes [mailto:david.holmes at oracle.com]
> > Sent: Donnerstag, 12. April 2018 11:29
> > To: Siebenborn, Axel <axel.siebenborn at sap.com>; portola-
> > dev at openjdk.java.net
> > Subject: Re: jtreg test test
> > java/lang/ClassLoader/nativeLibrary/NativeLibraryTest.java
> >
> > On 12/04/2018 7:03 PM, Siebenborn, Axel wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> > As there is no whitebox function to identify musl, I added one:
> >
> > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~asiebenborn/require_musl/webrev/
> >
> > What do you think?
> >
> > That works, but is there a musl equivalent of gnu_get_libc_version? A
> > simple native runtime check would be better than all the build time
> > machinations if possible.
> > I suppose there is nothing like that, on purpose.
> > For the same reasons, there is no __MUSL__ macro equivalent to
> > __GLIBC__:
> >
> > https://wiki.musl-
> > libc.org/faq.html#Q:_why_is_there_no_MUSL_macro_.3F
> >
> > Typical unrealistic idealistic response. :(
> >
> > I suppose if you can't dllookup gnu_get_libc_version then you could
> > assume it must be musl.
> > Probably, that would work, but maybe a bit to hacky ��.
> >
> >
> > In the build solution:
> >
> >   ifeq ($(HOTSPOT_TARGET_LIBC),musl)
> >
> > what sets this to musl? Is it a manually supplied configure arg?
> >
> > No need for a configure arg. It is determined by autoconf:
> > /make/autoconf.platform.m4
> > ... and config.guess parses the output of
> > ldd --version
> >
> > Well there's another option then :)
> >
> > I added a new webrev using ldd --version:
> >
> >
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~asiebenborn/require_musl/webrev_run_time/
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Axel
> >
> >
> >
> > Cheers,
> > David
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > David
> >
> >
> > David
> >
> >
> > Axel
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: David Holmes [mailto:david.holmes at oracle.com]
> > Sent: Dienstag, 10. April 2018 13:44
> > To: Siebenborn, Axel <mailto:axel.siebenborn at sap.com>; portola-
> > mailto:dev at openjdk.java.net
> > Subject: Re: jtreg test test
> > java/lang/ClassLoader/nativeLibrary/NativeLibraryTest.java
> >
> > On 10/04/2018 9:24 PM, Siebenborn, Axel wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> > I had a look on the test
> > java/lang/ClassLoader/nativeLibrary/NativeLibraryTest.java
> >
> >
> > This test fails, because a  loaded native library is not removed by
> > the
> >
> > GC.
> >
> > The native library should be unloaded by dlclose, but this is a noop
> > in
> >
> > musl
> >
> > (https://wiki.musl-libc.org/functional-differences-from-
> > glibc.html)
> >
> >
> > Any idea, how this should be handled?
> > Should this test be skipped for musl?
> >
> > I would say there is no choice :( Is there a whitebox function to
> > identify musl so you can use @requires ?
> >
> > I don't buy their argument as to why dlclose is a no-op. Yes it's
> > "safer" in the same sense that standing still is safer than moving -
> > but
> >
> > nowhere near as useful.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > David
> >
> > Regards,
> > Axel
> >