Issue 2197 was updated to exclude test by the simplest way (very simple
exclude files).
The next step will be looking through the issue 263. I'll try it.
It will fine if somebody take care about issue 2197 (exclude files for
win/lnx on x86 for IBM and DRl VMs).
Thanks, Vladimir
On 11/17/06, Alexei Zakharov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Vladimir,
It seems everybody likes this approach. In that case, I have another
idea for exclude lists. Can't we go further and extend the current
exclude list functionality a bit more? And forget about TestNG and
friends for a while I mean.
For example, we can put exclude lists into something like:
exclude.xml:
---
<exclude-list>
<!-- exclude only particular tests -->
<class name="org.apache.harmony.luni.test.java.io.MyTest">
<test name="testConstructor11"/>
<test name="testMyMethodObjectObjectString_HY1234"/>
</class>
<!-- exclude all tests -->
<class name="org.apache.harmony.luni.test.java.io.NiceTest2"
includeAll="true"/>
...
</exclude-list>
exclude.linux.drlvm.xml:
---
<exclude-list>
<class name="org.apache.harmony.rmi.test.java.rmi.Ð’adBoyTest">
<test name="testLinuxHang_my"/>
</class>
</exclude-list>
And etc. ${hy.platfrom}and ${hy.harmony.vm.name} can be passed to the
controller test suite by ant. By the controller test suite I mean the
java class that knows how to parse the above files (using simple SAX
parser for example - it is easy, I can help if needed) and implements
junit TestSuite model to get fine-grained control over the testing
process.
IMHO this can be a nice solution for now. It's more powerful since it
allows to exclude individual tests rather that whole classes. What do
you think?
Thanks,
2006/11/15, Vladimir Ivanov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Seems, we says about different things :)
>
> First of all, we have no TestNG (or other harness) yet but we need now
> different exclude lists for different platforms.
>
> Also, in my vision these exclude-lists are like a buffer before we mark
test
> by correct tags.
> When the test fails on some platform we update the corresponding x-list
and
> investigate this failure.
> As the result of investigation we mark the test or fix it.
>
> Thanks, Vladimir
>
>
> On 11/15/06, Alexei Zakharov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Things become more and more complicated. Can anyone say why we
> > rejected to use TestSuites for this purpose from the very beginning?
> > Well, I can't say I am against using xml lists here. But the next step
> > will be to keep list of individual failing test methods in the xml
> > file. Then to create separate xml lists for api and impl tests and so
> > on. If we can't run original TestNG on Harmony then we invent it by
> > ourselves. :-)
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > 2006/11/15, Vladimir Ivanov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > > As part of solution for this issue the
> > > *HARMONY-2197*<http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-2197>
was
> > > created.
> > >
> > > I suggest using the separate exclude list for each platform. I hope
in
> > this
> > > case the test enabling for the different platforms will be easy.
Please,
> > > look at it.
> > >
> > > Any comments are welcome :)
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Thanks, Vladimir
> > >
> > >
> > > On 11/15/06, Alexei Fedotov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Pavel, you are correct. Rana, sorry for confusion. Both issues
block
> > > > passing class library unit tests.
> > > >
> > > > http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-2070 [drlvm][thread]
> > > > Unhandled exception in java.exe while java.util.jar module tests
> > > > execution
> > > >
> > > > http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-2073 [drlvm][unit]
> > > > org.apache.harmony.beans.tests.java.beans.PersistenceDelegateTest
> > > >
> > > > I've used a debugger and caught an assert in
> > > > exn_raise_by_name_internal for the second one. The first one
contains
> > > > three diffrent issues, and I cannot say where exactly the problem
is.
> > > >
> > > > On 11/15/06, Pavel Afremov < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > As I understand Alexey means HARMONY-2073, but not HARMONY-2070.
> > > > >
> > > > > Alexei, is it correct? If not, could you clarify the point about
> > > > > exn_raise_by_name_internal in your initial letter, please?
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Pavel Afremov.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On 11/8/06, Rana Dasgupta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > OK thanks Pavel, I'll try the patch today.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Rana
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 11/8/06, Pavel Afremov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi Rana.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I extend guard region as work around. It's only one way,
which
> > "fix"
> > > > SOE
> > > > > > > on
> > > > > > > my SuSE Linux, without potential regression of your fix. On
my
> > Linux
> > > >
> > > > > > > machine
> > > > > > > violation access signals happen one page before protected
page
> > on
> > > > the
> > > > > > > stack.
> > > > > > > It's it.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I ran all tests, and everything was OK. But strange misprint
was
> > > > fount
> > > > > > in
> > > > > > > the new test.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > So I attach new fixed patch.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Pavel Afremov.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On 11/8/06, Rana Dasgupta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Though I tried several times, I could not repro 2070 or
> > Alexey's
> > > > > > > specific
> > > > > > > > problems. The test attached to 2018 repros, and that I
think
> > is
> > > > > > enough.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Pavel,
> > > > > > > > 1. The patch looks good, but I could not apply and try
it
> > since
> > > > my
> > > > > > > Linux
> > > > > > > > box is down.
> > > > > > > > 2. Did you run all tests ( smoke, cuint, kernel, and
> > classlib )?
> > > >
> > > > > > Since
> > > > > > > > this fully turns on lazy exceptions, we need to ensure
that
> > all
> > > > tests
> > > > > > > > pass,
> > > > > > > > or at least have identical behaviour before and after the
> > pacth.
> > > > > > > > 3. Adding a finalizer based stack test to smoke is a
good
> > idea.
> > > > > > > > 4. On Linux you extend the guard region up ( or down
> > whatever )
> > > > by a
> > > > > > > > page. Did you find a good reason for it, or is this just
being
> > > > > > careful?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Rana
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On 11/7/06, Pavel Afremov < [EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Rana,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Everything is correct in you description, but it looks
like
> > that
> > > > *
> > > > > > > > > HARMONY-2018* <
> > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-2018>
> > > > > > > > should
> > > > > > > > > fix described bug. I think Alexei will have a chance to
> > check
> > > > it.
--
Alexei Zakharov,
Intel Enterprise Solutions Software Division
