Withdrawn: 8332260: Mark tools/jlink/JLinkReproducibleTest.java as intermittent failure

On Wed, 15 May 2024 03:28:29 GMT, SendaoYan wrote: > Hi all, > The `tools/jlink/JLinkReproducibleTest.java` intermittent fails on linux > aarch64. Should we mark this testcase as `@key intermittent`. No risk. > > Thanks. > -sendao This pull request has been closed withou

Re: RFR: 8332260: Mark tools/jlink/JLinkReproducibleTest.java as intermittent failure

On Wed, 15 May 2024 03:41:02 GMT, Jaikiran Pai wrote: > Hello @sendaoYan, the linked issue > https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8327181 which talks about a JVM crash > looks very generic and not specific to this test. Before updating this test, > I think that issue needs to

RFR: 8332260: Mark tools/jlink/JLinkReproducibleTest.java as intermittent failure

Hi all, The `tools/jlink/JLinkReproducibleTest.java` intermittent fails on linux aarch64. Should we mark this testcase as `@key intermittent`. No risk. Thanks. -sendao - Commit messages: - 8332260: mark tools/jlink/JLinkReproducibleTest.java as intermittent failure - 8332260:

Re: RFR: 8323640: [TESTBUG]testMemoryFailCount in jdk/internal/platform/docker/TestDockerMemoryMetrics.java always fail because OOM killed [v3]

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

Re: RFR: 8326461: tools/jlink/CheckExecutable.java fails as .debuginfo files are not executable

On Thu, 22 Feb 2024 07:23:04 GMT, SendaoYan wrote: > Before JDK-8325342(commit id:0bcece995840777db660811e4b20bb018e90439b), all > the files in build/linux-x86_64-server-release/images/jdk/bin are executable: > > ![image](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/assets/24123821/13f0eae2-71

Re: RFR: 8327486: java/util/Properties/PropertiesStoreTest.java fails "Text 'xxx' could not be parsed at index 20" after 8174269 [v3]

On Mon, 11 Mar 2024 15:15:39 GMT, Naoto Sato wrote: > LGTM @naotoj Thanks for the review. - PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/18155#issuecomment-2043989340

Re: RFR: 8327486: java/util/Properties/PropertiesStoreTest.java fails "Text 'xxx' could not be parsed at index 20" after 8174269 [v3]

On Sat, 9 Mar 2024 13:18:14 GMT, SendaoYan wrote: >> Date.toString() uses Locale.US explicitly for printing the time zone, so >> replace Locale.ROOT to Locale.US in this testcase for fix the test failure. >> >> This testcase fixed has been verified. >> >> O

Integrated: 8327486: java/util/Properties/PropertiesStoreTest.java fails "Text 'xxx' could not be parsed at index 20" after 8174269

On Thu, 7 Mar 2024 16:47:01 GMT, SendaoYan wrote: > Date.toString() uses Locale.US explicitly for printing the time zone, so > replace Locale.ROOT to Locale.US in this testcase for fix the test failure. > > This testcase fixed has been verified. > > Only change the tes

Re: RFR: 8327486: java/util/Properties/PropertiesStoreTest.java fails "Text 'xxx' could not be parsed at index 20" after 8174269 [v3]

> Date.toString() uses Locale.US explicitly for printing the time zone, so > replace Locale.ROOT to Locale.US in this testcase for fix the test failure. > > This testcase fixed has been verified. > > Only change the testcase, risk is low. SendaoYan has updated the pull req

Re: RFR: 8327486: java/util/Properties/PropertiesStoreTest.java fails "Text 'xxx' could not be parsed at index 20" after 8174269 [v3]

On Fri, 8 Mar 2024 17:29:09 GMT, Naoto Sato wrote: >> SendaoYan has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional >> commit since the last revision: >> >> update the Locale.US code comment >> >> Signed-off-by: sendaoYa

Re: RFR: 8327486: java/util/Properties/PropertiesStoreTest.java fails "Text 'xxx' could not be parsed at index 20" after 8174269 [v2]

On Thu, 7 Mar 2024 21:07:12 GMT, Naoto Sato wrote: > Thanks for the fix. Although setting `Locale.US` to acquire the formatter is > correct, the reasoning is not. The real reason is that `Date.toString()` uses > `Locale.US` explicitly for printing the time zone > >

Re: RFR: 8327486: java/util/Properties/PropertiesStoreTest.java fails "Text 'xxx' could not be parsed at index 20" after 8174269 [v2]

On Fri, 8 Mar 2024 02:41:06 GMT, SendaoYan wrote: >> Date.toString() uses Locale.US explicitly for printing the time zone, so >> replace Locale.ROOT to Locale.US in this testcase for fix the test failure. >> >> This testcase fixed has been verified. >> >> O

Re: RFR: 8327486: java/util/Properties/PropertiesStoreTest.java fails "Text 'xxx' could not be parsed at index 20" after 8174269 [v2]

> The DATE_FORMAT_PATTERN is set to "EEE MMM dd HH:mm:ss zzz ", is the time > format of US. So, creates a formatter should using Locale.US, rather than > Locale.ROOT, which means empty. SendaoYan has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit sinc

RFR: 8327486: java/util/Properties/PropertiesStoreTest.java fails "Text 'xxx' could not be parsed at index 20" after 8174269

The DATE_FORMAT_PATTERN is set to "EEE MMM dd HH:mm:ss zzz ", is the time format of US. So, creates a formatter should using Locale.US, rather than Locale.ROOT, which means empty. - Commit messages: - 8327486: java/util/Properties/PropertiesStoreTest.java fails "Text 'xxx'

Integrated: 8326461: tools/jlink/CheckExecutable.java fails as .debuginfo files are not executable

On Thu, 22 Feb 2024 07:23:04 GMT, SendaoYan wrote: > Before JDK-8325342(commit id:0bcece995840777db660811e4b20bb018e90439b), all > the files in build/linux-x86_64-server-release/images/jdk/bin are executable: > > ![image](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/assets/24123821/13f0eae2-71

RFR: 8326461: tools/jlink/CheckExecutable.java fail after JDK-8325342

Before JDK-8325342(commit id:0bcece995840777db660811e4b20bb018e90439b), all the files in build/linux-x86_64-server-release/images/jdk/bin are executable:  After JDK-8325342, all the *.debuginfo files

Integrated: 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 This pull request has now been integrated. Changeset: 791b427f Author:sendaoYan Committer

Re: RFR: 8323640: [TESTBUG]testMemoryFailCount in jdk/internal/platform/docker/TestDockerMemoryMetrics.java always fail because OOM killed [v3]

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

Re: RFR: 8323640: [TESTBUG]testMemoryFailCount in jdk/internal/platform/docker/TestDockerMemoryMetrics.java always fail because OOM killed [v3]

> 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

Re: RFR: 8323640: [TESTBUG]testMemoryFailCount in jdk/internal/platform/docker/TestDockerMemoryMetrics.java always fail because OOM killed [v2]

> 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

Re: RFR: 8323640: [TESTBUG]testMemoryFailCount in jdk/internal/platform/docker/TestDockerMemoryMetrics.java always fail because OOM killed

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

Re: RFR: 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

RFR: 8323640: [TESTBUG]testMemoryFailCount in jdk/internal/platform/docker/TestDockerMemoryMetrics.java always fail because OOM killed

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

Withdrawn: 8323640: [TESTBUG]testMemoryFailCount in jdk/internal/platform/docker/TestDockerMemoryMetrics.java always fail because OOM killed

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

Re: RFR: 8323640: [TESTBUG]testMemoryFailCount in jdk/internal/platform/docker/TestDockerMemoryMetrics.java always fail because OOM killed [v2]

> 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

Re: RFR: 8323640: [TESTBUG]testMemoryFailCount in jdk/internal/platform/docker/TestDockerMemoryMetrics.java always fail because OOM killed

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

RFR: 8323640: [TESTBUG]testMemoryFailCount in jdk/internal/platform/docker/TestDockerMemoryMetrics.java always fail because OOM killed

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: