On Tue, 18 Feb 2025 19:26:09 GMT, Jiangli Zhou <jian...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> Please review this change that adds the `jdk.static` VMProps. It can be used >> to skip tests not for running on static JDK. >> >> This also adds a new WhiteBox native method, >> `jdk.test.whitebox.WhiteBox.isStatic()`, which is used by VMProps to >> determine if it's static at runtime. >> >> `@requires !jdk.static` is added in >> `test/hotspot/jtreg/runtime/modules/ModulesSymLink.java` to skip running the >> test on static JDK. This test uses `bin/jlink`, which is not provided on >> static JDK. There are other tests that require tools in `bin/`. Those are >> not modified by the current PR to skip running on static JDK. Those can be >> done after the current change is fully discussed and reviewed/approved. > > Jiangli Zhou has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a > merge or a rebase. The incremental webrev excludes the unrelated changes > brought in by the merge/rebase. The pull request contains two additional > commits since the last revision: > > - Merge branch 'master' into JDK-8349620 > - - Add 'jdk.static' in VMProps. It can be used to skip tests not for > running on static JDK. > - Add WhiteBox isStatic() native method. It's used by VMProps to determine > of it's static at runtime. > - Add in '@requires !jdk.static' in > test/hotspot/jtreg/runtime/modules/ModulesSymLink.java to skip the test on > static JDK since it requires bin/jlink. Changes look good. > I'm also wondering if we would want to merge the isStatic into isHermetic > check in the future. I guess it is unlikely we will package each jtreg test into single, hermetic files, each containing the whole JDK? If so, we probably won't need `isHermetic` for jtreg tests. ------------- Marked as reviewed by manc (Committer). PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/23528#pullrequestreview-2625325934
