On Fri, 1 Dec 2023 11:07:06 GMT, Stefan Karlsson <stef...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> Can I please get a review for this change to the test library's >> `OutputAnalyzer` class, which proposes to remove some unnecessary logging >> from the `getExitValue()` call? >> >> As noted in https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8321163, right now this >> method logs: >> >> >> [2023-11-24T11:47:54.557561Z] Waiting for completion for process 24909 >> [2023-11-24T11:47:54.557873Z] Waiting for completion finished for process >> 24909 >> >> >> even when the process has already completed and the exit value already >> known. The change in this PR makes it such that if the exit value is >> available then we no longer log this (nor call `process.waitFor()`). >> >> No new tests have been added given the nature of this change. tier1, tier2 >> and tier3 tests continue to pass with this change. > > test/lib/jdk/test/lib/process/OutputBuffer.java line 150: > >> 148: @Override >> 149: public int getExitValue() { >> 150: Integer exitCode = this.processExitCode; > > Do we really need the local `exitCode` variable? Even if another multiple > threads write to processExitCode, I expect them to all write a non-null > Integer. Hello Stefan, this is just for a tiny optimization to prevent multiple reads (in the same thread) on the `volatile` field `processExitCode` in this method. ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/16919#discussion_r1411952233
