[9] RFR: JDK-8164322: sun/security/pkcs11/PKCS11Test.java shall be updated to run on ARM platforms

Xuelei Fan xuelei.fan at oracle.com
Thu Sep 29 00:52:27 UTC 2016


Hi Artem,

What do you think fix the testing infrastructure (JPRT/Mach5) with 
proper configuration?  I think it is a easier than update a large bunch 
of test codes.

I understand the concerns of yours, but I don't want add additional 
effort for those who need to run the test on their own environment. 
Some people run the test locally before submit JPRT jobs (or no access 
to JPRT systems for external people).

Update the testing infrastructure may solve both of your concerns and my 
concerns.

I'm not sure the @requires tag would work or not.  It would be great if 
you can find a solution with the tag.

Thanks,
Xuelei

On 9/29/2016 4:32 AM, Artem Smotrakov wrote:
> Hi Xuelei,
>
> I understand your concerns. But I'd prefer to be aware of situations
> when a test reports that it passed when it actually did nothing.
>
> How about using @requires key? We can try to specify all expected
> platforms. If I understand correctly, jtreg won't run tests if specified
> requirements are not met. In this case, you need to look at the report
> to make sure all tests you are interested in were run.
>
> Artem
>
>
> On 09/28/2016 08:00 AM, Xuelei Fan wrote:
>> On 9/28/2016 9:20 PM, Denis Kononenko wrote:
>>> There're 60+ tests related to PKCS11. Two years they have been
>>> "passed" on 3 unsupported platforms on hosts where usually no NSS
>>> libraries were installed. How can we rely on these results?
>> ;-) The words of "unsupported platforms" are very confusing in this
>> mail thread.
>>
>> Let's think more about what if a test failed.  What one will do if a
>> test failed?
>> 1. Test fail means source code problems for developers.  One cannot
>> submit a change-set if a test failed.  He need to pay additional
>> effort and analysis the failure.  It take one developer a lot effort
>> to know the root cause.  I would never like this unnecessary cost.
>> 2. In order to get the test pass, he need to install the NSS libs
>> although NSS has nothing to do with his changeset.  It may be a very
>> very hard step or even impossible (for example licenses issues) step
>> for him.
>>
>> TBH, I did not see much benefits to fail on unsupported platforms.  I
>> agree that skip for pass is not a good idea, but fail to warn is worse.
>>
>> I think the root cause if "unsupported platforms" actually are
>> supported platforms, but by accident the NSS libraries are not
>> installed or not installed properly.
>>
>> If one is not interested in NSS, the test get ignored (passed). If one
>> is interested in NSS, he should install the NSS libs and the test get
>> checked.
>>
>> What do you think if fix the testing infrastructure with properly
>> installed NSS libs?
>>
>> > The problem is the tests report they passed but actually they were
>> > skipped. I have no objections against skipping tests but it would
>> > be better to give a hint somehow how many tests were skipped and why.
>> Agreed.  Unfortunately, there are only two options, "pass" or "fail",
>> at present.  It would be nice if there is a grey area. Any idea to
>> make summary of skipped tests and reasons?
>>
>> Xuelei
>


More information about the security-dev mailing list