Reviewed-by: Yi Yang
-
Commit messages:
- 8323640: [TESTBUG]testMemoryFailCount in
jdk/internal/platform/docker/TestDockerMemoryMetrics.java always fail because
OOM killed
Changes: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/17386/files
Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=17386
On Fri, 12 Jan 2024 03:31:37 GMT, sendaoYan wrote:
> Reviewed-by: Yi Yang
The test case before this PR has a maximum heap of 64MB and applies for 8M of
memory each time in the for loop. When applying for memory for the sixth time,
it was killed by the docker container because of
> 8323640: [TESTBUG]testMemoryFailCount in
> jdk/internal/platform/docker/TestDockerMemoryMetrics.java always fail because
> OOM killed
sendaoYan has refreshed the contents of this pull request, and previous commits
have been removed. The incremental views will show differences compar
On Fri, 12 Jan 2024 03:31:37 GMT, sendaoYan wrote:
> 8323640: [TESTBUG]testMemoryFailCount in
> jdk/internal/platform/docker/TestDockerMemoryMetrics.java always fail because
> OOM killed
This pull request has been closed without being integrated.
-
PR: https://git.op
8323640: [TESTBUG]testMemoryFailCount in
jdk/internal/platform/docker/TestDockerMemoryMetrics.java always fail because
OOM killed
-
Commit messages:
- 8323640: [TESTBUG]testMemoryFailCount in
jdk/internal/platform/docker/TestDockerMemoryMetrics.java always fail because
OOM killed
On Mon, 22 Jan 2024 09:31:43 GMT, sendaoYan wrote:
> 8323640: [TESTBUG]testMemoryFailCount in
> jdk/internal/platform/docker/TestDockerMemoryMetrics.java always fail because
> OOM killed
The test case before this PR has a maximum heap of 64MB and applies for 8M of
memory each time i
On Mon, 22 Jan 2024 15:03:18 GMT, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
> `1k` increments for a total of `512k` times seems overkill. Are you sure
> that's needed to make the test pass? How about `1MB` increments for a total
> of `512` times?
When the docker serivice work normally on the test machine, this t
> 8323640: [TESTBUG]testMemoryFailCount in
> jdk/internal/platform/docker/TestDockerMemoryMetrics.java always fail because
> OOM killed
sendaoYan has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit
since the last revision:
8323640: [TESTBUG]testMemoryFailCoun
> 8323640: [TESTBUG]testMemoryFailCount in
> jdk/internal/platform/docker/TestDockerMemoryMetrics.java always fail because
> OOM killed
sendaoYan has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit
since the last revision:
8323640: [TESTBUG]testMemoryFailCoun
On Tue, 23 Jan 2024 13:04:43 GMT, sendaoYan wrote:
>> 8323640: [TESTBUG]testMemoryFailCount in
>> jdk/internal/platform/docker/TestDockerMemoryMetrics.java always fail
>> because OOM killed
>
> sendaoYan has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
On Mon, 22 Jan 2024 09:31:43 GMT, sendaoYan wrote:
> 8323640: [TESTBUG]testMemoryFailCount in
> jdk/internal/platform/docker/TestDockerMemoryMetrics.java always fail because
> OOM killed
This pull request has now been integrated.
Changeset: 791b427f
Author:sendaoYan
Committer
On Tue, 23 Jan 2024 13:04:43 GMT, SendaoYan wrote:
>> 8323640: [TESTBUG]testMemoryFailCount in
>> jdk/internal/platform/docker/TestDockerMemoryMetrics.java always fail
>> because OOM killed
>
> SendaoYan has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
Hi,
GHA
[runner](https://github.com/sendaoYan/jdk-ysd/actions/runs/8881868940/job/24386063136)
shows that serviceability/dcmd/gc/RunFinalizationTest.java intermittent fail
on macos-aarch64. This testcase should be problemlist.
Only change the ProblemList, no risk.
-
Commit
On Sat, 4 May 2024 10:22:06 GMT, Serguei Spitsyn wrote:
> Looks okay to me.
@sspitsyn Thanks.
-
PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19033#issuecomment-2094774327
> Hi,
> GHA
> [runner](https://github.com/sendaoYan/jdk-ysd/actions/runs/8881868940/job/24386063136)
> shows that serviceability/dcmd/gc/RunFinalizationTest.java intermittent fail
> on macos-aarch64. The testcase has been problemlisted on
> linux-all,windows-x64,aix-ppc64.
On Tue, 7 May 2024 17:43:02 GMT, Chris Plummer wrote:
>> SendaoYan has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> problemlist serviceability/dcmd/gc/RunFinalizationTest.java on generic-all
>
> test/hots
On Wed, 8 May 2024 07:37:52 GMT, Serguei Spitsyn wrote:
>> SendaoYan has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> problemlist serviceability/dcmd/gc/RunFinalizationTest.java on generic-all
>
> Marked as
On Wed, 8 May 2024 16:39:33 GMT, Chris Plummer wrote:
>> SendaoYan has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> problemlist serviceability/dcmd/gc/RunFinalizationTest.java on generic-all
>
> Marked as r
On Thu, 9 May 2024 21:26:07 GMT, Daniel D. Daugherty wrote:
> I've updated the bug's sysnopsis:
>
> s/macos-aarch64/generic-all/
>
> The fastest way to update the PR's title is with `/issue JDK-8331466`
@dcubed-ojdk Thanks.
-
PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19033#is
On Wed, 1 May 2024 14:14:22 GMT, SendaoYan wrote:
> Hi,
> GHA
> [runner](https://github.com/sendaoYan/jdk-ysd/actions/runs/8881868940/job/24386063136)
> shows that serviceability/dcmd/gc/RunFinalizationTest.java intermittent fail
> on macos-aarch64. The testcase has been p
On Wed, 8 May 2024 01:19:05 GMT, SendaoYan wrote:
>> Hi,
>> GHA
>> [runner](https://github.com/sendaoYan/jdk-ysd/actions/runs/8881868940/job/24386063136)
>> shows that serviceability/dcmd/gc/RunFinalizationTest.java intermittent
>> fail on macos-aarch64. The t
Hi all,
ObjectMonitorUsage.java failed with `unexpected waiter_count` after
[JDK-8328083](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8328083) on linux x86_32. It
should be predicated with `@requires vm.continuations` to be skipped.
Additional testing:
- [x] linux x86_32, test has been skiped.
- [x] l
On Sun, 26 May 2024 11:26:50 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
> That would mean it's not tested. I suspect the
> java_lang_VirtualThread::is_instance checks will need to be changed to test
> with is_a(vmClasses::BaseVirtualThread_klass()) to allow for the alternative
> implementation.
Do you mean cha
On Sun, 26 May 2024 16:43:50 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
> > > That would mean it's not tested. I suspect the
> > > java_lang_VirtualThread::is_instance checks will need to be changed to
> > > test with is_a(vmClasses::BaseVirtualThread_klass()) to allow for the
> > > alternative implementation.
x86_32, test has been skiped.
> - [x] linux x86_64, test still work.
SendaoYan has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit
since the last revision:
1. java_lang_VirtualThread::is_instance(thread_oop) ->
thread_oop->is_a(vmClasses::BaseVirtualThread_klass
e this PR, which has been recorded
> in [JDK-8333140](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8333140)
> - [ ] linux x86_64 run all testcases in serviceability/jvmti, all testcases
> run successed.
>
> [x64.log](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/files/15480081/x64.log)
> [x86.log](https://
On Thu, 30 May 2024 00:17:04 GMT, Serguei Spitsyn wrote:
>> SendaoYan has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> 1. java_lang_VirtualThread::is_instance(thread_oop) ->
>> thread_oop->is_a(vmCl
On Thu, 30 May 2024 00:18:14 GMT, Serguei Spitsyn wrote:
> The fix looks good in general but I've inlined one suggestion.
Thank you for your correction. The code has been updated accordingly your
suggest. I need redo the additional testing to verify it.
-
PR Comment: https://git.o
On Thu, 30 May 2024 01:13:20 GMT, SendaoYan wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> ObjectMonitorUsage.java failed with `unexpected waiter_count` after
>> [JDK-8328083](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8328083) on linux x86_32.
>> There are two changes in this PR
Hi all,
This trivial fix, delete the extra empty line before `getOopMaps` function in
`src/jdk.hotspot.agent/share/classes/sun/jvm/hotspot/code/CodeBlob.java` file.
No risk.
-
Commit messages:
- 853: Delete extra empty line in CodeBlob.java
Changes: https://git.openjdk.org/
On Fri, 31 May 2024 12:29:59 GMT, SendaoYan wrote:
> Hi all,
> This trivial fix, delete the extra empty line before `getOopMaps` function
> in `src/jdk.hotspot.agent/share/classes/sun/jvm/hotspot/code/CodeBlob.java`
> file.
> No risk.
The GHA test runner report a failure
On Fri, 31 May 2024 16:30:55 GMT, Chris Plummer wrote:
> Approved and trivial.
Thanks for the review and approved.
-
PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19499#issuecomment-2142650762
On Thu, 30 May 2024 06:36:09 GMT, SendaoYan wrote:
>> SendaoYan has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> change from java_lang_VirtualThread::is_instance(thread_oop) to
>> hread_oop->is_a(vmClass
On Sun, 26 May 2024 09:27:00 GMT, SendaoYan wrote:
> Hi all,
> ObjectMonitorUsage.java failed with `unexpected waiter_count` after
> [JDK-8328083](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8328083) on linux x86_32.
> There are two changes in this PR:
> 1. I
On Thu, 30 May 2024 01:13:20 GMT, SendaoYan wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> ObjectMonitorUsage.java failed with `unexpected waiter_count` after
>> [JDK-8328083](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8328083) on linux x86_32.
>> There are two changes in this PR
On Fri, 31 May 2024 12:29:59 GMT, SendaoYan wrote:
> Hi all,
> This trivial fix, delete the extra empty line before `getOopMaps` function
> in `src/jdk.hotspot.agent/share/classes/sun/jvm/hotspot/code/CodeBlob.java`
> file.
> No risk.
This pull request has now been integra
On Fri, 31 May 2024 12:29:59 GMT, SendaoYan wrote:
> Hi all,
> This trivial fix, delete the extra empty line before `getOopMaps` function
> in `src/jdk.hotspot.agent/share/classes/sun/jvm/hotspot/code/CodeBlob.java`
> file.
> No risk.
Thanks all for the rev
Hi all,
This PR several extra empty spaces and extra empty lines in several
Makefiles. It's trivial fix, no risk.
Thanks.
-
Commit messages:
- 8333477: Delete extra empty spaces in Makefiles
Changes: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19537/files
Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.
On Tue, 4 Jun 2024 07:47:46 GMT, SendaoYan wrote:
> Hi all,
> This PR several extra empty spaces and extra empty lines in several
> Makefiles. It's trivial fix, no risk.
>
> Thanks.
> /label build
Thanks.
-
PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/
On Tue, 4 Jun 2024 07:47:46 GMT, SendaoYan wrote:
> Hi all,
> This PR several extra empty spaces and extra empty lines in several
> Makefiles. It's trivial fix, no risk.
>
> Thanks.
Thanks for the review.
Thanks all for the review.
-
PR Comment: https:/
> Hi all,
> This PR several extra empty spaces and extra empty lines in several
> Makefiles. It's trivial fix, no risk.
>
> Thanks.
SendaoYan has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit
since the last revision:
delete extra empty trailing bla
On Thu, 6 Jun 2024 17:49:08 GMT, Chen Liang wrote:
>> SendaoYan has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> delete extra empty trailing blank line in
>> test/jdk/java/rmi/reliability/benchmark/bench/
On Fri, 7 Jun 2024 07:29:39 GMT, SendaoYan wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> This PR several extra empty spaces and extra empty lines in several
>> Makefiles. It's trivial fix, no risk.
>>
>> Thanks.
>
> SendaoYan has updated the pull request incrementally wit
On Fri, 7 Jun 2024 12:53:46 GMT, Chen Liang wrote:
>> No, it's an extra newline. A file should end with a newline but one is
>> enough.
>
> As confusing as they are, unfortunately GitHub UI does not render extra
> trailing newlines. This is the only one I could find with grepWin.
I find the ex
On Tue, 4 Jun 2024 07:47:46 GMT, SendaoYan wrote:
> Hi all,
> This PR several extra empty spaces and extra empty lines in several
> Makefiles. It's trivial fix, no risk.
>
> Thanks.
This pull request has now been integrated.
Changeset: d130d2f4
Author:SendaoYa
On Fri, 7 Jun 2024 07:29:39 GMT, SendaoYan wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> This PR several extra empty spaces and extra empty lines in several
>> Makefiles. It's trivial fix, no risk.
>>
>> Thanks.
>
> SendaoYan has updated the pull request incrementally wit
Hi all,
After [JDK-8294960](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8294960), the
footprint memory usage increased significantly when run the testcase with
-Xcomp jvm options, then cause the testcase was killed by docker by OOM.
Maybe the footprint memory usage increased was inevitable, so I thin
Hi all,
The newly added test `com/sun/jdi/BreakpointOnClassPrepare.java` fails at
`SUSPEND_NONE` mode.
To make this test less noisy, should we disable the SUSPEND_NONE mode for now.
-
Commit messages:
- 8335137: Disable the SUSPEND_NONE mode of BreakpointOnClassPrepare.java
Changes
On Wed, 26 Jun 2024 06:36:05 GMT, SendaoYan wrote:
> Hi all,
> The newly added test `com/sun/jdi/BreakpointOnClassPrepare.java` fails at
> `SUSPEND_NONE` mode.
> To make this test less noisy, should we disable the SUSPEND_NONE mode for now.
> @sendaoYan I have a PR out to f
On Wed, 26 Jun 2024 06:36:05 GMT, SendaoYan wrote:
> Hi all,
> The newly added test `com/sun/jdi/BreakpointOnClassPrepare.java` fails at
> `SUSPEND_NONE` mode.
> To make this test less noisy, should we disable the SUSPEND_NONE mode for now.
This pull request has been closed w
On Tue, 2 Jul 2024 20:49:05 GMT, Dean Long wrote:
> Why does 8M trigger the OOM Killer, but 1M does not?
8M trigger the OOM killer on some environments, maybe there are some test
machines that 8M trigger the OOM exception rather than OOM killer.
The intention of change `8M chunks per iteration`
Hi all,
Test TestClhsdbJstackLock.java/TestJhsdbJstackLock.java fails with -Xcomp after
[JDK-8335743](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8335743). I think the new
failures was testcase bug.
The change has been verified by -Xmixed/-Xcomp(c2)/-Xcomp
-XX:TieredStopAtLevel=1(c1), only change the t
On Fri, 12 Jul 2024 03:24:42 GMT, SendaoYan wrote:
> Hi all,
> Test TestClhsdbJstackLock.java/TestJhsdbJstackLock.java fails with -Xcomp
> after [JDK-8335743](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8335743). I think the
> new failures was testcase bug.
>
> https://github.co
On Fri, 12 Jul 2024 03:24:42 GMT, SendaoYan wrote:
> Hi all,
> Test TestClhsdbJstackLock.java/TestJhsdbJstackLock.java fails with -Xcomp
> after [JDK-8335743](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8335743). I think the
> new failures was testcase bug.
>
> https://github.co
On Fri, 12 Jul 2024 03:24:42 GMT, SendaoYan wrote:
> Hi all,
> Test TestClhsdbJstackLock.java/TestJhsdbJstackLock.java fails with -Xcomp
> after [JDK-8335743](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8335743). I think the
> new failures was testcase bug.
>
> https://github.co
On Fri, 12 Jul 2024 08:27:47 GMT, Alex Menkov wrote:
> > Fix the testcase bug, I think it's not need the 2rd reviewer.
>
> My bad for hasty sponsorship. General rules are applied to test fixes - 2
> reviewers and at least 24 hours for review.
Sorry for hasty integrate, I will pay attention nex
Hi all,
The testcase `serviceability/attach/LongArgTest.java` intermittent fails
`java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError: jdk/test/lib/Utils`. Jtreg doesn't
automatically compile `jdk/test/lib/Utils.class` and
`jdk/test/lib/apps/LingeredApp.class` etc.. Maybe it's a jtreg framework bug.
I think it's ne
On Mon, 24 Jun 2024 16:16:29 GMT, SendaoYan wrote:
> Hi all,
> After [JDK-8294960](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8294960), the
> footprint memory usage increased significantly when run the testcase with
> -Xcomp jvm options, then cause the testcase was killed by d
On Thu, 18 Jul 2024 05:52:51 GMT, Jaikiran Pai wrote:
> So I think we should have this increase in memory reviewed by @asotona or
> someone familiar in that area, before deciding whether these tests should be
> changed.
Okey.
-
PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19864#i
On Thu, 18 Jul 2024 04:57:27 GMT, Jaikiran Pai wrote:
>> SendaoYan has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> delete @build LongArgTest
>
> test/hotspot/jtreg/serviceability/attach/LongArgTest.java
jtreg framework bug.
> I think it's necessory to compile `jdk.test.lib.Utils` and
> `jdk.test.lib.apps.LingeredApp` explicitly.
> Only change the testcase, the change has been verified, no risk.
SendaoYan has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit
si
On Thu, 18 Jul 2024 08:45:43 GMT, Serguei Spitsyn wrote:
> Looks okay. I agree this needs to be reviewed by @asotona .
Thanks for the review. I will wait reviewed by @asotona before integrate.
-
PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19864#issuecomment-2236003849
On Mon, 24 Jun 2024 16:16:29 GMT, SendaoYan wrote:
> Hi all,
> After [JDK-8294960](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8294960), the
> footprint memory usage increased significantly when run the testcase with
> -Xcomp jvm options, then cause the testcase was killed by d
On Thu, 18 Jul 2024 11:42:17 GMT, SendaoYan wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> After [JDK-8294960](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8294960), the
>> footprint memory usage increased significantly when run the testcase with
>> -Xcomp jvm options, then cause the testcase was
On Mon, 24 Jun 2024 16:16:29 GMT, SendaoYan wrote:
> Hi all,
> After [JDK-8294960](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8294960), the
> footprint memory usage increased significantly when run the testcase with
> -Xcomp jvm options, then cause the testcase was killed by d
On Mon, 24 Jun 2024 16:16:29 GMT, SendaoYan wrote:
> Hi all,
> After [JDK-8294960](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8294960), the
> footprint memory usage increased significantly when run the testcase with
> -Xcomp jvm options, then cause the testcase was killed by d
Hi all,
The newly added testcase
`serviceability/jvmti/vthread/TestPinCaseWithCFLH/TestPinCaseWithCFLH.java`
fails with `-Xcomp` jvm option. The jvm option `-Xcomp` will make
`BackgroundCompilation` false. In this test, disable `BackgroundCompilation`
will make `instrumentation` in `premain`
On Mon, 9 Sep 2024 05:11:44 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
> I think we need to understand why this happens, as I don't see this being a
> test issue. I assume the test needs to run under a none-US locale for the
> problem to arise?
The locale of test enviroment is `en_US.UTF-8`, and this test also
server-release/images/jdk/bin/java`,
so I think I am testing an images build.
bash configure --with-jobs=32
--prefix=/tmp/tone/run/jtreg/jdk-repo/install-release --verbose
--with-debug-level=release --enable-unlimited-crypto
--with-vendor-name=yansendao --with-vendor-url=https://github.com/sen
On Mon, 9 Sep 2024 08:37:58 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
> Can you say if there are any other modifications to the JDK that is being
> tested? I'm wondering if anyone else can duplicate this.
No, there is no any modification of the tested JDK. This failure only occur on
specific environments, seem
On Sun, 8 Sep 2024 15:30:21 GMT, SendaoYan wrote:
> Hi all,
> The newly added testcase
> `serviceability/jvmti/vthread/TestPinCaseWithCFLH/TestPinCaseWithCFLH.java`
> fails with `-Xcomp` jvm option. The jvm option `-Xcomp` will make
> `BackgroundCompilation` false. In thi
On Mon, 9 Sep 2024 09:18:24 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
> I assume the sleep or System.gc is just delaying the install of the
> transformer. I think this issue will require more investigation. The "main"
> method hasn't run so I assume the issue is nothing to do with virtual threads
> and the dia
On Wed, 2 Oct 2024 15:44:58 GMT, SendaoYan wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> Test `com/sun/tools/attach/PermissionTest.java` fails access denied after
>> [JDK-8327114](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8327114). This testcase
>> need the `readlink` permission of file `/proc/sel
Hi all,
In
[make/RunTests.gmk](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/master/make/RunTests.gmk#L208),
the keyword is 'TEST_THREAD_FACTORY'.
So the below test command will print error:
make test TEST=test/jdk/java/math/BigInteger/TestValueExact.java
CONF=linux-x86_64-server-release JTREG="JTREG_TE
nue. Stop.
>
>
> So I think we should fix the document bug in `doc/testing.md` to avoid take
> the same mistake. Trivial fix, no risk.
SendaoYan has updated the pull request incrementally with two additional
commits since the last revision:
- JTREG="TEST_THREAD_FACTORY=Virtual&
On Mon, 21 Oct 2024 12:48:55 GMT, Erik Joelsson wrote:
>> SendaoYan has updated the pull request incrementally with two additional
>> commits since the last revision:
>>
>> - JTREG="TEST_THREAD_FACTORY=Virtual"
>> - Use JTREG="JTREG_TEST_THREAD_
On Mon, 21 Oct 2024 13:12:55 GMT, SendaoYan wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> In
>> [make/RunTests.gmk](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/master/make/RunTests.gmk#L208),
>> the keyword is 'TEST_THREAD_FACTORY'.
>>
>> So the below test command will print e
On Sun, 20 Oct 2024 02:11:11 GMT, SendaoYan wrote:
> Hi all,
> In
> [make/RunTests.gmk](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/master/make/RunTests.gmk#L208),
> the keyword is 'TEST_THREAD_FACTORY'.
>
> So the below test command will print error:
>
> make test
Hi all,
The copyright year of some files which has been changed by
[JDK-8341692](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8341692) wasn't update
correctly. This PR update the copyright year of
[JDK-8341692](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8341692). Trivial fix, no
risk.
-
Commit m
Hi all,
To make less CI noisy, before the root cause of
[JDK-8343244](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8343244) has fixed, should we
problemlist the failure tests, include AttachTest.java and
TestZPageAllocationEvent.java
-
Commit messages:
- 8343244: Problemlist AttachTest.jav
On Thu, 18 Jul 2024 07:30:47 GMT, SendaoYan wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> The testcase `serviceability/attach/LongArgTest.java` intermittent fails
>> `java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError: jdk/test/lib/Utils`. Jtreg doesn't
>> automatically compile `jdk/test/lib/Utils.clas
Hi all,
Test `com/sun/tools/attach/PermissionTest.java` fails access denied after
[JDK-8327114](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8327114). This testcase need
the `readlink` permission of file `/proc/self/ns/mnt` after
[JDK-8327114](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8327114).
So this PR add
-8327114).
> So this PR add `readlink` permission to make this test work normally.
> Before this PR, test run failed, after this PR, test run success. Test fix
> only, no risk.
SendaoYan has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit
since the last revision:
mer
On Mon, 30 Sep 2024 17:05:08 GMT, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
>> SendaoYan has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> merge two comments enclosed with /* ... */ on two lines
>
> test/jdk/com/sun/tools/at
On Tue, 1 Oct 2024 15:38:56 GMT, SendaoYan wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> Test `com/sun/tools/attach/PermissionTest.java` fails access denied after
>> [JDK-8327114](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8327114). This testcase
>> need the `readlink` permission of file `/proc/sel
On Tue, 1 Oct 2024 21:13:35 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
>> SendaoYan has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> merge two comments enclosed with /* ... */ on two lines
>
> test/jdk/com/sun/tools/at
On Wed, 2 Oct 2024 15:36:23 GMT, Daniel D. Daugherty wrote:
> @sendaoYan - This failure is quite noisy in the Oracle CI. We see many
> failures in Tier[567]. When will you be integrating your fix?
Sorry, these days are statutory holidays in China, so my PR processing is quite
slow.
-8327114).
> So this PR add `readlink` permission to make this test work normally.
> Before this PR, test run failed, after this PR, test run success. Test fix
> only, no risk.
SendaoYan has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit
since the last revision
On Wed, 2 Oct 2024 15:44:58 GMT, SendaoYan wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> Test `com/sun/tools/attach/PermissionTest.java` fails access denied after
>> [JDK-8327114](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8327114). This testcase
>> need the `readlink` permission of file `/proc/sel
On Mon, 30 Sep 2024 16:11:27 GMT, SendaoYan wrote:
> Hi all,
> Test `com/sun/tools/attach/PermissionTest.java` fails access denied after
> [JDK-8327114](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8327114). This testcase
> need the `readlink` permission of file `/proc/self/ns/mnt` a
On Wed, 6 Nov 2024 06:53:34 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
>> SendaoYan has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> change os-arch to generic-all
>
> test/jdk/ProblemList.txt line 779:
>
>> 777: j
> Hi all,
> To make less CI noisy, before the root cause of
> [JDK-8343244](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8343244) has fixed, should
> we problemlist the failure tests, include AttachTest.java and
> TestZPageAllocationEvent.java
SendaoYan has updated the pull request inc
On Wed, 6 Nov 2024 06:55:41 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
>> SendaoYan has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> 1. change os-arch to linux-all; 2. delete
>> jdk/jfr/event/gc/detailed/TestZPageAllocat
> Hi all,
> To make less CI noisy, before the root cause of
> [JDK-8343244](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8343244) has fixed, should
> we problemlist the failure tests, include AttachTest.java and
> TestZPageAllocationEvent.java
SendaoYan has updated the pull request inc
> Hi all,
> To make less CI noisy, before the root cause of
> [JDK-8343244](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8343244) has fixed, should
> we problemlist the failure tests, include AttachTest.java and
> TestZPageAllocationEvent.java
SendaoYan has updated the pull request inc
On Wed, 6 Nov 2024 08:19:42 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
>> SendaoYan has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> 1. change os-arch to linux-all; 2. delete
>> jdk/jfr/event/gc/detailed/TestZPageAllocat
On Thu, 7 Nov 2024 01:23:32 GMT, Leonid Mesnik wrote:
> Please update bug/PR summary to reflect actual changes.
Thanks for the remind. The bug and PR summary has been updated.
-
PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/21917#issuecomment-2461149994
On Wed, 6 Nov 2024 02:39:24 GMT, SendaoYan wrote:
> Hi all,
> To make less CI noisy, before the root cause of
> [JDK-8343244](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8343244) has fixed, should
> we problemlist the failure tests, include AttachTest.java and
> TestZPageAllocationE
On Wed, 6 Nov 2024 08:39:08 GMT, SendaoYan wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> To make less CI noisy, before the root cause of
>> [JDK-8343244](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8343244) has fixed, should
>> we problemlist the failure tests, include AttachTest.java and
>>
On Sat, 23 Nov 2024 13:08:13 GMT, SendaoYan wrote:
> Hi all,
> The newly added test
> `test/hotspot/jtreg/serviceability/sa/TestJhsdbJstackPrintVMLocks.java`
> intermittent fails `the return value of
> "jdk.test.lib.apps.LingeredApp.getProcess()" is null`. This PR c
1 - 100 of 156 matches
Mail list logo
