[jdk17] RFR: 8067223: [TESTBUG] Rename Whitebox API package

[Igor Ignatyev]

On Thu, 29 Jul 2021 01:30:37 GMT, Vladimir Kozlov <kvn at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Hi all,
>> 
>> could you please review this big tedious and trivial(-ish) patch which moves `sun.hotspot.WhiteBox` and related classes to `jdk.test.whitebox` package?
>> 
>> the majority of the patch is the following substitutions:
>>  - `s~sun/hotspot/WhiteBox~jdk/test/whitebox/WhiteBox~g`
>>  - `s/sun.hotspot.parser/jdk.test.whitebox.parser/g`
>>  - `s/sun.hotspot.cpuinfo/jdk.test.whitebox.cpuinfo/g`
>>  - `s/sun.hotspot.code/jdk.test.whitebox.code/g`
>>  - `s/sun.hotspot.gc/jdk.test.whitebox.gc/g`
>>  - `s/sun.hotspot.WhiteBox/jdk.test.whitebox.WhiteBox/g`
>> 
>> testing: tier1-4
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> -- Igor
>
> I know that tests fixes could be pushed during RDP2 without approval.
> But these one is very big and it is not a fix - it is enhancement.
> 
> What is the reason you want to push it into JDK 17 just few days before first Release Candidate? Instead of pushing it into JDK 18.
> 
> And I can't even review it because GutHub UI hangs on these big changes.

@vnkozlov, @dholmes-ora,

Thank you for looking at this!

I want this to be integrated into JDK 17 b/c some "external" libraries use (used to use) WhiteBox API, e.g. jcstress[[2]] used WhiteBox API to deoptimize compiled methods[[3]], and it would be easier for maintainers of such libraries to condition package name based on JDK major version. Also, given JDK 17 is an LTS, it would be beneficial for everyone not to have big differences in test bases b/w it and the mainline.

according to JEP 3, test RFEs are allowed until the very end and don't require late enhancement approval: "Enhancements to tests and documentation during RDP 1 and RDP 2 do not require approval, as long as the relevant issues are identified with a noreg-self or noreg-doc label, as appropriate"[[1]]. So, process-wise, I don't see any issues w/ integrating this RFE, yet, I fully agree that due to its size, this patch can be disruptive and can cause massive failures, which is something we obviously don't want at the current stage of JDK 17. 

I like David's idea about phasing this clean-up, and, due to the reasons described above, I would like to integrate the first part, copying WhiteBox classes to the new package structure and associated changes w/o updating all the tests, into JDK 17 and update the tests on the mainline (w/ backporting into jdk17u).

WDYT?

Cheers,
-- Igor

[1]: https://openjdk.java.net/jeps/3#Late-Enhancement-Request-Process
[2]: https://github.com/openjdk/jcstress
[3]: https://github.com/openjdk/jcstress/blob/df83b446f187ae0b0fa31fa54decb59db9e955da/jcstress-core/src/main/java/org/openjdk/jcstress/vm/WhiteBoxSupport.java

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

PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk17/pull/290