On Thu, 20 Mar 2025 20:59:34 GMT, David Holmes <dhol...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> The file to setup special arguments to native JTReg Hotspot tests is >> needlessly complicated. With some generalisation, we can make it much >> simpler. > > make/test/JtregNativeHotspot.gmk line 121: > >> 119: -I$(VM_TESTBASE_DIR)/nsk/stress/jni \ >> 120: -I$(VM_TESTBASE_DIR)/vm/mlvm/share \ >> 121: -I$(VM_TESTBASE_DIR)/vm/share \ > > Including these directories for every native test seems a little risky. Are > we sure there are no header files with the same name? Can we not still add > these only if the test needs them e.g. if it has vmTestBase in its name for > the nsk tests? I don't know if it is "risky". Compare this with how all hotspot files are compiled, with all these include directories: build/macosx-aarch64/hotspot/variant-server/gensrc build/macosx-aarch64/hotspot/variant-server/gensrc/adfiles build/macosx-aarch64/support/modules_include/java.base build/macosx-aarch64/support/modules_include/java.base/darwin open/src/hotspot/cpu/aarch64 open/src/hotspot/os_cpu/bsd_aarch64 open/src/hotspot/os/bsd open/src/hotspot/os/posix open/src/hotspot/os/posix/include open/src/hotspot/share open/src/hotspot/share/include open/src/java.base/share/native/include open/src/java.base/share/native/libjimage open/src/java.base/unix/native/include Are we sure that there are no header files of the same name here? We can check, and there are none. Can we be sure that no one will add a conflicting header? Well, yes, since then the product would not compile as expected. Going back to the test files. This is the complete list of all header files present in these directories: test/hotspot/jtreg/vmTestbase/nsk/share/aod/aod.hpp test/hotspot/jtreg/vmTestbase/nsk/share/jni/ExceptionCheckingJniEnv.hpp test/hotspot/jtreg/vmTestbase/nsk/share/jni/jni_tools.hpp test/hotspot/jtreg/vmTestbase/nsk/share/jvmti/agent_common/agent_common.hpp test/hotspot/jtreg/vmTestbase/nsk/share/jvmti/aod/jvmti_aod.hpp test/hotspot/jtreg/vmTestbase/nsk/share/jvmti/Injector.hpp test/hotspot/jtreg/vmTestbase/nsk/share/jvmti/jvmti_FollowRefObjects.hpp test/hotspot/jtreg/vmTestbase/nsk/share/jvmti/jvmti_tools.hpp test/hotspot/jtreg/vmTestbase/nsk/share/jvmti/JVMTITools.hpp test/hotspot/jtreg/vmTestbase/nsk/share/native/native_thread.hpp test/hotspot/jtreg/vmTestbase/nsk/share/native/nsk_list.hpp test/hotspot/jtreg/vmTestbase/nsk/share/native/nsk_mutex.hpp test/hotspot/jtreg/vmTestbase/nsk/share/native/nsk_tools.hpp test/hotspot/jtreg/vmTestbase/nsk/stress/jni/jnihelper.hpp test/hotspot/jtreg/vmTestbase/vm/mlvm/share/mlvmJvmtiUtils.hpp test/lib/jdk/test/lib/jvmti/jvmti_common.hpp test/lib/jdk/test/lib/jvmti/jvmti_thread.hpp As you can see, there are no conflicts. Most of the names are very specific and include some part of their specific "package" in the name. It seems highly unlikely to me that someone would add another header file with the same name as any of these. And, also, if someone were to do that after this PR, the tests would fail to compile as expected, so it can't really happen by mistake. (I do note the weird fact that there is both a `jvmti_tools.hpp` and a `JVMTITools.hpp` in `test/hotspot/jtreg/vmTestbase/nsk/share/jvmti`. Seems confused to me.) ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/24130#discussion_r2006562840
