RFR (M): 8231595 [TEST] develop a test case for SuspendThreadList including current thread
Alex Menkov
alexey.menkov at oracle.com
Wed Oct 2 17:21:39 UTC 2019
+1
--alex
On 10/01/2019 19:27, David Holmes wrote:
> Looks good.
>
> Thanks,
> David
>
> On 2/10/2019 9:57 am, serguei.spitsyn at oracle.com wrote:
>> Hi David,
>>
>> Yes, this is another place to fix the same typo, thanks.
>> It has to be results[i] instead of err.
>> I'll update the webrev in place.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Serguei
>>
>> On 10/1/19 4:00 PM, David Holmes wrote:
>>> Hi Serguei,
>>>
>>> Shouldn't this:
>>>
>>> 80 for (int i = 0; i < threadsCount; i++) {
>>> 81 LOG(" thread #%d: (%d)", i, (int)results[i]);
>>> 82 check_jvmti_status(jni, err, "suspendTestedThreads: error in
>>> SuspendThreadList");
>>>
>>> also be testing results[i] rather than err? Or do you need to test
>>> err independently, as well as each result?
>>>
>>> David
>>>
>>> On 2/10/2019 8:33 am, serguei.spitsyn at oracle.com wrote:
>>>> Alex, Chris and David,
>>>>
>>>> The updated webrev is:
>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sspitsyn/webrevs/2019/8231595-jvmti-susp-tlist.3/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> This version changes are:
>>>> - the "first" and "last" are passed to the test to set the
>>>> suspenderIndex
>>>> - fixed typo at line 120
>>>> - the ThreadToSuspend.run() loop is simplified
>>>> - fixed typo in check_jvmti_status in the loop of
>>>> resumeTestedThreads()
>>>>
>>>> Probably, just one sanity check would be enough.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Serguei
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 10/1/19 2:20 PM, serguei.spitsyn at oracle.com wrote:
>>>>> Hi Chris,
>>>>>
>>>>> On 10/1/19 12:46 PM, Chris Plummer wrote:
>>>>>> Hi Serguei,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If someone changes THREADS_COUNT, then SuspenderIndex would no
>>>>>> longer do what we want. I suggest passing in something like
>>>>>> "first" and "last".
>>>>>
>>>>> Okay, I'll update it this way.
>>>>>
>>>>>> 120 * - main thread registers tested threads withing the native
>>>>>> agent library
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Should be "within".
>>>>>
>>>>> Good catch, will fix it.
>>>>>
>>>>>> I think you should add a comment above all the "n" and "i" logic
>>>>>> explaining what it is for, although TBH, I don't see how this is
>>>>>> making the method "hot" and therefore trigger compilation. The
>>>>>> loop alone should be enough for that. In fact I would think the
>>>>>> more iterations through the loop, the sooner it would be compiled,
>>>>>> and this extra logic just slows down the iteration rate.
>>>>>
>>>>> Agreed.
>>>>> I'll try to simplify it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Serguei
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> thanks,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Chris
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 9/30/19 10:45 PM, serguei.spitsyn at oracle.com wrote:
>>>>>>> Hi Chris, David and Alex,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The updated webrev is:
>>>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sspitsyn/webrevs/2019/8231595-jvmti-susp-tlist.2/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It includes the changes:
>>>>>>> - added a general comment explaining the test logic suggested
>>>>>>> by David
>>>>>>> - setAllThreadsReady() is static now, the obsolete comment
>>>>>>> before it is deleted
>>>>>>> - now the test is run twice: with the suspender thread first
>>>>>>> and last in the list
>>>>>>> - removed the local variable "success" in the run() method
>>>>>>> - several native agent methods return "void" now
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>> Serguei
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 9/30/19 13:49, Chris Plummer wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 9/30/19 1:30 PM, serguei.spitsyn at oracle.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 9/30/19 13:25, Chris Plummer wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 9/30/19 1:21 PM, serguei.spitsyn at oracle.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Chris,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you for reviewing this!
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 9/28/19 12:33, Chris Plummer wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Serguei,
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Overall looks good. A few questions:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I don't understand the need for all the 'i' and 'n'
>>>>>>>>>>>> theatrics in the shouldFinish loop. Can you explain and also
>>>>>>>>>>>> add a comment?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I used this part from one of the old SuspendThreadList nsk
>>>>>>>>>>> tests in the vmTestbase.
>>>>>>>>>>> As I understand it, the point was to make sure the JVMTI
>>>>>>>>>>> SuspendThreadList works well
>>>>>>>>>>> wen the top frames executed on tested threads have been
>>>>>>>>>>> compiled.
>>>>>>>>>>> These code is needed to make the run() method hot.
>>>>>>>>>>> I can add a comment if you think it is not clear.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Is this comment right?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> 193 // set thread is not ready again
>>>>>>>>>>>> 194 public void setAllThreadsReady() {
>>>>>>>>>>>> 195 allThreadsReady = true;
>>>>>>>>>>>> 196 }
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Nice catch.
>>>>>>>>>>> The comment is not needed anymore.
>>>>>>>>>>> Is a leftover from previous test version.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Also, shouldn't "setAllThreadsReady()" be static?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Right. It has to be static. Will fix it.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Do you think it would be useful to also run the test with
>>>>>>>>>>>> the last thread in the list being the suspender thread?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure it is worth to do it.
>>>>>>>>>>> It'd add more complexity into the test.
>>>>>>>>>>> We could try to make the suspender thread to be random though.
>>>>>>>>>> I don't think random is good. Makes it hard to reproduce an
>>>>>>>>>> issue if it turns up. I was thinking just rerun the test for
>>>>>>>>>> each possible suspender.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Good idea to rerun the test and pass the suspender thread index
>>>>>>>>> in the arguments.
>>>>>>>>> Do you think, two runs would be good enough or we also need an
>>>>>>>>> index somewhere in the middle?
>>>>>>>> Maybe just first and last indices would be good. I'm not sure
>>>>>>>> something in the middle helps any.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Chris
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>> Serguei
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> thanks,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Chris
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>>> Serguei
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> thanks,
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Chris
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 9/27/19 6:25 PM, serguei.spitsyn at oracle.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please, review fix for test enhancement:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8231595
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Webrev:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sspitsyn/webrevs/2019/8231595-jvmti-susp-tlist.1/
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Summary:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> New test is a coverage for the JVMTI bug:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8217762
>>>>>>>>>>>>> SuspendThreadList won't work correctly if the current
>>>>>>>>>>>>> thread is not last in the list
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> It provides a prove the bug JDK-8217762 does not exist
>>>>>>>>>>>>> as the test is passed with the current implementation.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Serguei
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>
More information about the serviceability-dev
mailing list