On Mon, 15 Jan 2024 11:05:09 GMT, Aleksey Shipilev <sh...@openjdk.org> wrote:
> Since recent work to improve `tier4` performance, we actually test > `tier{1,2,3,4}` often, which includes all the tests in current tree. It would > be more convenient to just have the `all` test group/alias, so that we can do > `make test TEST=all`. This also gives a parallelism / run time benefit, as we > do not wait for tests in each tier to complete before moving to next tier. > > Sample run on out-of-the-box Linux x86_64 fastdebug is below. For some > environments one also needs to supply a few keywords like `!printer` to skip > tests that cannot complete without failure due to misconfiguration. I left > the keywords as is to show how would a failing run look. There is also an > existing shortcut in build system that allows to run this with `make > test-all`. > > > % make test TEST=all > > Test selection 'all', will run: > * jtreg:test/hotspot/jtreg:all > * jtreg:test/jdk:all > * jtreg:test/langtools:all > * jtreg:test/jaxp:all > * jtreg:test/lib-test:all > > (...about 6 hours later...) > > ============================== > Test summary > ============================== > TEST TOTAL PASS FAIL ERROR > >>> jtreg:test/hotspot/jtreg:all 6731 6702 29 0 << >>> jtreg:test/jdk:all 9962 9951 11 0 << > jtreg:test/langtools:all 4469 4469 0 0 > > jtreg:test/jaxp:all 513 513 0 0 > > jtreg:test/lib-test:all 32 32 0 0 > > ============================== > TEST FAILURE Okay - change is harmless with no ongoing maintenance cost. test/jdk/TEST.groups line 28: > 26: # > 27: > 28: all = \ Why no `jdk_all` definition in this case? ------------- Marked as reviewed by dholmes (Reviewer). PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/17422#pullrequestreview-1822313872 PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/17422#discussion_r1452781088