RFR:8153978:New test to verify the modules info as returned by the JVMTI
Alexander Kulyakhtin
alexander.kulyakhtin at oracle.com
Mon Jun 20 11:48:32 UTC 2016
Hi Christian, Sergey,
Thank you for the clarification. I did not realize the 4.2 is already being used.
Sergey, do you want me to push the fix now or would you be pushing the fix yourself, since there may be any changes you have in mind?
Best regards,
Alexander
----- Original Message -----
From: serguei.spitsyn at oracle.com
To: christian.tornqvist at oracle.com, alexander.kulyakhtin at oracle.com
Cc: serviceability-dev at openjdk.java.net
Sent: Sunday, June 19, 2016 10:09:33 AM GMT +03:00 Iraq
Subject: Re: RFR:8153978:New test to verify the modules info as returned by the JVMTI
Hi Christian,
Thank you for the reply!
Serguei
On 6/18/16 17:33, Christian Tornqvist wrote:
Hi Serguei,
We’re currently using jtreg 4.2 b02, so you should be able to do this.
Thanks,
Christian
From: serviceability-dev [ mailto:serviceability-dev-bounces at openjdk.java.net ] On Behalf Of serguei.spitsyn at oracle.com
Sent: Friday, June 17, 2016 7:39 PM
To: Alexander Kulyakhtin <alexander.kulyakhtin at oracle.com>
Cc: serviceability-dev at openjdk.java.net
Subject: Re: RFR:8153978:New test to verify the modules info as returned by the JVMTI
Hi Alexander,
I'm curious if the jtreg 4.2 is out and this test can be pushed now?
I'd want to use the same pattern to write the Jigsaw related JVMTI tests.
Thanks,
Serguei
On 5/5/16 04:25, Alexander Kulyakhtin wrote:
Sergey,
Thank you very much for the review.
I will be pushing the fix as soon as jtreg 4.2 is out, since 4.2 has the fix for CODETOOLS-7901662, required for this test.
Best regards,
Alexander
From: serguei.spitsyn at oracle.com
To: alexander.kulyakhtin at oracle.com
Cc: serviceability-dev at openjdk.java.net , aleksey.voytilov at oracle.com
Sent: Wednesday, May 4, 2016 11:31:07 PM GMT +03:00 Iraq
Subject: Re: RFR:8153978:New test to verify the modules info as returned by the JVMTI
Hi Alexander,
It looks good.
Thank you for making the changes!
Thanks,
Serguei
On 5/4/16 05:17, Alexander Kulyakhtin wrote:
Hi Sergey,
Thank you very much for the review.
Please, find the updated webrev with your findings corrected at:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~akulyakh/8153978_02/index.html
Best regards,
Alexander
----- Original Message -----
From: serguei.spitsyn at oracle.com
To: alexander.kulyakhtin at oracle.com , serviceability-dev at openjdk.java.net
Cc: aleksey.voytilov at oracle.com
Sent: Tuesday, May 3, 2016 1:06:05 AM GMT +03:00 Iraq
Subject: Re: RFR:8153978:New test to verify the modules info as returned by the JVMTI
Hi Alexander,
Could you, fix a couple of minor issues?
test/serviceability/jvmti/GetModulesInfo/JvmtiGetAllModulesTest.java 58 for(Module mod : my.modules()) { 59 if(!jvmtiModules.contains(mod)) { A space is missed after the 'for' and 'if' keywords.
test/serviceability/jvmti/GetModulesInfo/ModulesInfo.java. 31 boolean compareExcludingUnnamed(ModulesInfo other) { I'd suggest to call it compareNamed.
Otherwise, the new test looks great.
Thanks a lot for taking care about it!
Thanks,
Serguei
On 4/29/16 06:12, Alexander Kulyakhtin wrote:
Hi, Could you, please, review these test-only changes (adding a new test). CR: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8153978 "New test to verify the modules info as returned by the JVMTI" Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~akulyakh/8153978_01/ The new test verifies that JVMTI returns the correct info about the modules loaded at the application startup. It also verifies that the returned info is consistent with the same info returned by the Java API. It then loads a new named module and checks the correctness of the JVMTI info again. Due to a tools issue https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/CODETOOLS-7901662 the test can only be pushed in when the updated jtreg is released. The test passes fine with the nightly jtreg build, containing the CODETOOLS-7901662 fix. Best regards, Alexander
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/serviceability-dev/attachments/20160620/ba9cc5de/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the serviceability-dev
mailing list