RFR(T): 8247495: ProblemList vmTestbase/nsk/jvmti/SetFieldAccessWatch/setfldw001/TestDescription.java

[Chris Plummer]

On 6/12/20 11:52 AM, Daniel D. Daugherty wrote:
> On 6/12/20 2:49 PM, Chris Plummer wrote:
>> Hi Dan,
>>
>> What's the criteria for "noise".
>
> There is no specific criteria that I'm aware of.
>
> It popped up in today's JDK15 testing so it got on my radar (again).
>
>
>> I don't consider the failures for this test as noisy. I only see 3 in 
>> mach5 CI testing for all of JDK 15. JDK 14 does  appear to have been 
>> somewhat noisy, possibly enough so that it looks like maybe something 
>> changed to reduce the number of failures in 15. In any case, do you 
>> plan on backporting to 14?
>
> This failure has been around in one form or another since JDK7. If 
> someone
> decides to fix it, then they can un-ProblemList it.
>
> I'm planning to push it to JDK15 and JDK16. Those two releases are the 
> focus
> of my CI noise reduction efforts. I don't monitor the JDK14u CI...
>
> May I proceed with the ProblemListing?
I just don't feel if we problem list tests with this failure rate that 
in the long run it is a productive or good thing to do. 3 failures 
during an entire 6 month CI test cycle seems rather low to me. I'd like 
to get opinions from others.

Chris
>
> Dan
>
>>
>> thanks,
>>
>> Chris
>>
>> On 6/12/20 9:46 AM, Daniel D. Daugherty wrote:
>>> Greetings,
>>>
>>> It's time to reduce the noise in the CI so I'm ProblemListing tests.
>>>
>>> Here's the bug for failure:
>>>
>>>     JDK-8205957 setfldw001/TestDescription.java fails with bad field 
>>> value
>>>     https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8205957
>>>
>>> and here's the bug for the ProblemListing:
>>>
>>>     JDK-8247495 ProblemList 
>>> vmTestbase/nsk/jvmti/SetFieldAccessWatch/setfldw001/TestDescription.java 
>>>
>>>     https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8247495
>>>
>>> I'm considering this a trivial change so I need a single (R)eviewer.
>>>
>>> Here's the context diff for the change:
>>>
>>> $ hg diff
>>> diff -r 015533451f4c test/hotspot/jtreg/ProblemList.txt
>>> --- a/test/hotspot/jtreg/ProblemList.txt    Fri Jun 12 09:31:08 2020 
>>> -0700
>>> +++ b/test/hotspot/jtreg/ProblemList.txt    Fri Jun 12 12:40:17 2020 
>>> -0400
>>> @@ -141,6 +141,7 @@
>>>  vmTestbase/nsk/jvmti/scenarios/jni_interception/JI05/ji05t001/TestDescription.java 
>>> 8219652 aix-ppc64
>>>  vmTestbase/nsk/jvmti/scenarios/jni_interception/JI06/ji06t001/TestDescription.java 
>>> 8219652 aix-ppc64
>>>  vmTestbase/nsk/jvmti/SetJNIFunctionTable/setjniftab001/TestDescription.java 
>>> 8219652 aix-ppc64
>>> +vmTestbase/nsk/jvmti/SetFieldAccessWatch/setfldw001/TestDescription.java 
>>> 8205957 generic-all
>>>
>>>  vmTestbase/gc/lock/jni/jnilock002/TestDescription.java 
>>> 8208243,8192647 generic-all
>>>
>>>
>>> This issue is actually much older than JDK-8205957 would indicate
>>> (first sighting in JDK11 for that bug ID). The older version of
>>> the test is covered by https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-6528079
>>> and that failures first sighting is in JDK7.
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks, in advance, for any comments, questions, or suggestions.
>>>
>>> Dan
>>>
>>
>>
>