Fwd: RFR:8147847: (re-review) serviceability/tmtools/jstat tests are failing with -XX:+ExplicitGCInvokesConcurrent

[Jaroslav Bachorik]

On 5.2.2016 13:14, Alexander Kulyakhtin wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Could I, please, have any feedback on this trivial tests-only review?

Thumbs up!

-JB-

>
> Best regards,
> Alexander
>
> ----- Forwarded Message -----
> From: alexander.kulyakhtin at oracle.com
> To: serviceability-dev at openjdk.java.net
> Sent: Wednesday, February 3, 2016 2:21:44 PM GMT +03:00 Iraq
> Subject: RFR:8147847: (re-review) serviceability/tmtools/jstat tests are failing with -XX:+ExplicitGCInvokesConcurrent
>
> Hi,
>
> Could you, please, re-review the following tests-only fix:
>
> CR: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8147847 "serviceability/tmtools/jstat tests are failing with -XX:+ExplicitGCInvokesConcurrent"
> Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~akulyakh/8147847_2/index.html
>
> In addition to disabling the -XX:+ExplicitGCInvokesConcurrent option we have corrected some of the test assertions to eliminate occasional false failures of the tests
> of the type "Error in the percent calculation (eden size: 0, heap size: 8192, calculated eden percent: 0.0)"
>
> Best regards,
> Alexander
>
>
> ----- Forwarded Message -----
> From: alexander.kulyakhtin at oracle.com
> To: serviceability-dev at openjdk.java.net
> Sent: Monday, February 1, 2016 3:59:57 PM GMT +03:00 Iraq
> Subject: RFR:8147847:serviceability/tmtools/jstat tests are failing with -XX:+ExplicitGCInvokesConcurrent
>
> Hi,
>
> Could you, please, review this trivial tests-only fix:
>
> CR: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8147847 "serviceability/tmtools/jstat tests are failing with -XX:+ExplicitGCInvokesConcurrent"
> Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~akulyakh/8147847/index.html
>
> The changed tests compare the output from the "jstat -gc" (or from similar commands) before and after an explicit garbage collection has taken place.
> Therefore, the tests should not be executed if the option -XX:+ExplicitGCInvokesConcurrent is set.
> The fix uses the @requires tag to make sure this is the case.
>
> Best regards,
> Alexander
>