[9] RFR (M) 8054386: Allow Java debugging when CDS is enabled

[serguei.spitsyn at oracle.com]

Chris,

It looks good in general.
I'd suggest to rename the folder:
|| test/com/sun/jdi/CDSJDITests
to:
   test/com/sun/jdi/cds

There is no need to spell "JDI" as it is already a sub-folder of the 
com/sun/jdi
and there is no need to spell "Tests" too as it is in the test repo.
Also, all the folders are normally named in the lower case.

Thanks,
Serguei


On 6/2/15 8:25 PM, Chris Plummer wrote:
> Ok, I'm going to keep this as one webrev, but I did create JDK-8081771 
> for the ProcessTool.java changes:
>
> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8081771
>
> I will commit ProcessTool.java under JDK-8081771, and the rest of the 
> changes under JDK-8054386. Both will then be pushed together. I also 
> started a new thread for the review of JDK-8081771:
>
> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-runtime-dev/2015-June/014930.html
> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2015-June/033892.html
>
> thanks,
>
> Chris
>
> On 6/2/15 11:55 AM, Chris Plummer wrote:
>> I'm going to have to separate out the ProcessTool.java changes into a 
>> separate changeset (and CR). In the meantime, feel free to review 
>> what I have below. The code won't be changing at all when I separate 
>> out the ProcessTool.java changes.
>>
>> thanks,
>>
>> Chris
>>
>> On 6/2/15 12:36 AM, Chris Plummer wrote:
>>> [Adding core-libs-dev at openjdk.java.net since this update includes 
>>> changes to jdk/test library code]
>>>
>>> Please review the updated webrev:
>>>
>>> Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~cjplummer/8054386/webrev.02/
>>> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8054386
>>>
>>> There were concerns about the new hotspot tests referencing jdk 
>>> tests. One concern was that if the jdk tests change, they could 
>>> break the hotspot tests, and this might initially go undetected. The 
>>> other concern is that if the jdk and hotspot tests are placed in 
>>> separate test bundles, then it would not be possible to run the 
>>> hotspot tests.
>>>
>>> Because of these concerns, I moved the tests that were in 
>>> hotspot/test/runtime/CDSJDITests to instead be in 
>>> jdk/test/com/sun/jdi/CDSJDITests. There was a slight renaming of the 
>>> tests in the process. Also, I had to update the jdk version of 
>>> ProcessTool.java to include the createJavaProcessBuilder() variant 
>>> that is in the hotspot version of ProcessTool.java.
>>>
>>> Lastly, in CDSJITTest.java I changed:
>>>
>>>     OutputAnalyzer output = new OutputAnalyzer(pb.start());
>>>
>>> to instead be:
>>>
>>>     OutputAnalyzer output = ProcessTools.executeProcess(pb);
>>>
>>> I had to do this since the jdk version of the OutputAnalyzer 
>>> constructor is not public. The 1st version is what is commonly used 
>>> in hostspot tests, and the 2nd version is what is commonly used in 
>>> jdk tests. I decided to adopt the jdk way rather than make the 
>>> OutputAnalyzer constructors public, although this will probably 
>>> happen eventually when the two versions are unified.
>>>
>>> thanks,
>>>
>>> Chris
>>>
>>>
>>> On 5/19/15 7:25 AM, Chris Plummer wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> Please review the following changes for allowing java debugging 
>>>> when CDS is enabled.
>>>>
>>>> Webrev:http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~cjplummer/8054386/webrev.01/
>>>> Bug:https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8054386
>>>>
>>>> The VM changes are simple. I removed the check that prevents 
>>>> debugging with CDS enabled, and added logic that will map the CDS 
>>>> archive RW when debugging is enabled.
>>>>
>>>> The tests are a bit more complex. There are a bunch of existing JDI 
>>>> tests for testing debugging support. Rather than start from scratch 
>>>> or clone them, I instead just wrote wrapper tests that put the 
>>>> relevant JDI test classes in the archive, and then invoke the JDI 
>>>> test. I did this for 3 of the JDI tests. If you feel there are 
>>>> others that would be good candidates, I'd be happy to add them. I'm 
>>>> looking for ones that would result in modification of the RO class 
>>>> metadata, such as setting a breakpoint (for which I already added 
>>>> two tests).
>>>>
>>>> Testing done:
>>>> -Using JPRT to run the new jtreg tests on all platforms.
>>>> -Using JPRT to run all jtreg runtime tests on linux x86 and x_64.
>>>> -Regular JPRT "-testset hotspot" run
>>>> -Putting the JCK JVMTI tests in the archive and then running them.
>>>> -Putting the nsk jdb, jdwp, jvmti, and jdi tests in the archive and 
>>>> then running them.
>>>> -Putting a simple test class in the archive and then setting a 
>>>> breakpoint on it using jdb
>>>>
>>>> Some of the above testing resulted in the discovery of bugs that 
>>>> still need to be addressed: JDK-8078644, JDK-8078730, and JDK-8079181.
>>>>
>>>> I also verified that without the change to map the archive RW, the 
>>>> above testing resulted in a SEGV, which is what you would expect 
>>>> (and actually want to see to prove that the testing is effective).
>>>>
>>>> thanks,
>>>>
>>>> Chris
>>>>
>>>
>>
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/serviceability-dev/attachments/20150603/343985bb/attachment-0001.html>