RFR: (small): JDK-8190307: SA: Sanity tests for the clhsdb commands: universe, intconstant, type

[David Holmes]

Hi Jini,

In addition to Sharath's comments please add @bug and @summary items to 
each test header.

Thanks,
David
-----

On 15/11/2017 2:31 AM, Sharath Ballal wrote:
> Hi Jini,
> 
> Code looks good.  Some nits.
> 
> TestUniverse.java:
> 
> These lines can be removed
>     26 import java.io.File;
>     33 import jdk.test.lib.process.ProcessTools;
>     84         int exitValue = p.exitValue();
> 
> TestType.java:
> 
> These lines can be removed
>     32 import jdk.test.lib.process.ProcessTools;
>     86         int exitValue = p.exitValue();
> 
> You may want to add few more strings in the defaultOutputStrings.
> 
> TestIntConstant.java
> 
> These lines can be removed
>     32 import jdk.test.lib.process.ProcessTools;
>     89         int exitValue = p.exitValue();
> 
> You may want to add few more strings in the defaultOutputStrings.
> 
> Thanks,
> Sharath (not a reviewer)
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jini George
> Sent: Tuesday, November 14, 2017 2:19 PM
> To: David Holmes; serviceability-dev at openjdk.java.net
> Subject: Re: RFR: (small): JDK-8190307: SA: Sanity tests for the clhsdb commands: universe, intconstant, type
> 
> Thank you very much, David. Here is the revised webrev:
> 
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jgeorge/8190307/webrev.02/
> 
> Have reduced the exitValue checking fragment and included p.destroyForcibly(). Also placed the creation of OutputAnalyzer before waiting for the jhsdb process exit, to avoid jhsdb hangs due to the output stream buffer not being consumed. (Thanks, Sharath!)
> 
> Thanks,
> Jini.
> 
> On 11/6/2017 12:58 PM, David Holmes wrote:
>> Hi Jini,
>>
>> On 3/11/2017 8:51 PM, Jini George wrote:
>>> Here is the updated webrev:
>>>
>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jgeorge/8190307/webrev.01/
>>>
>>> I have made changes to validate the test results of each command
>>> separately, done away with the asserts and have added some more comments.
>>
>> This looks much better to me - thanks. This fragment:
>>
>>             int exitValue = p.exitValue();
>>             OutputAnalyzer output = new OutputAnalyzer(p);
>>             System.out.println(output.getOutput());
>>
>>             if (exitValue != 0) {
>>                 throw new Error("clhsdb wasn't run successfully.");
>>             }
>>
>> can be reduced to:
>>
>> OutputAnalyzer output = new OutputAnalyzer(p);
>> output.shouldHaveExitValue(0);
>>
>> There's probably no need to print getOutput() as if anything goes
>> wrong it will be printed by OutputAnalyzer anyway. But that's your choice.
>>
>> It may also be advisable to ensure the process is destroyed if you get
>> an exception here:
>>
>>            try {
>>                p.waitFor();
>>            } catch (InterruptedException ie) {
>> +            p.destroyForcibly();
>>                throw new Error("Problem awaiting the child process: " +
>> ie, ie);
>>            }
>>
>> similar to how ProcessTools.executeProcess manages things.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> David
>> -----
>>
>>> Thank you,
>>> Jini.
>>>
>>> On 10/31/2017 12:32 PM, Jini George wrote:
>>>> Thank you for the quick review, David. My comments inline:
>>>>
>>>> On 10/30/2017 11:18 AM, David Holmes wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> Plus this assumes G1 is being used but Lingered App is started
>>>>>> using the test run vmOptions AFAICS so it would use whatever GC
>>>>>> were passed through, wouldn't it?
>>>>>
>>>>> Okay the above are just examples of "int constants" that will be
>>>>> printed when you dump all the "int constants". The G1 constant
>>>>> doesn't indicate (I presume) that G1 is the active GC.
>>>>
>>>> Yes, the int constants contain compile time values and there are
>>>> entries for all the GC types.
>>>>
>>>>> As I said to Sharath it would be good to validate the results of
>>>>> each command separately rather than collectively.
>>>>
>>>> Will do.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks!
>>>> - Jini.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> David
>>>>>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>
>>>>>> TestType.java
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The expected output is not quite so strange, but still could do
>>>>>> with some commentary.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>     90         Asserts.assertTrue(output.contains("type
>>>>>> G1CollectedHeap CollectedHeap"));
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Same comment about assuming G1.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> David
>>>>>> ------
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 30/10/2017 1:44 PM, Jini George wrote:
>>>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We have been working on writing sanity tests for the various
>>>>>>> jhsdb clhsdb commands of the SA to improve the robustness of the
>>>>>>> SA. As a part of this, here is a webrev for sanity tests for 3 of
>>>>>>> the clhsdb commands:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Bug ID: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8190307
>>>>>>> webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jgeorge/8190307/webrev.00/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I would like to request for reviews for this simple addition.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thank you,
>>>>>>> Jini.