[drlvm] gc.Finalizer smoke test fails more often than not

2006-10-16 Thread Geir Magnusson Jr
Usually with this : java: /home/geir/dev/apache/harmony/enhanced/trunk/working_vm/vm/vmcore/src/class_support/classloader.cpp:551: void ClassLoader::SuccessLoadingClass(const String*): Assertion `lc' failed. SIGABRT in VM code. Stack trace: addr2line: '[vdso]': No such file 1: ??

Re: [drlvm] gc.Finalizer smoke test fails more often than not

2006-10-16 Thread Ivan Volosyuk
I have created a JIRA issue for this problem some time ago. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-1556 It contains the description of what is going on. -- Ivan On 10/16/06, Geir Magnusson Jr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Usually with this : java:

Re: [drlvm] gc.Finalizer smoke test fails more often than not

2006-10-16 Thread Geir Magnusson Jr.
Well, it just seems to have gotten worse lately Anyone working on a fix? geir Ivan Volosyuk wrote: I have created a JIRA issue for this problem some time ago. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-1556 It contains the description of what is going on. -- Ivan On 10/16/06, Geir

Re: [drlvm] gc.Finalizer smoke test fails more often than not

2006-10-16 Thread Ivan Volosyuk
AFAIK, nobody does. On 10/16/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Well, it just seems to have gotten worse lately Anyone working on a fix? geir Ivan Volosyuk wrote: I have created a JIRA issue for this problem some time ago.

Re: [drlvm] gc.Finalizer smoke test fails more often than not

2006-10-16 Thread Pavel Afremov
I' m going look into this. Pavel Afremov. On 10/16/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Well, it just seems to have gotten worse lately Anyone working on a fix? geir Ivan Volosyuk wrote: I have created a JIRA issue for this problem some time ago.

Re: [drlvm] gc.Finalizer smoke test fails more often than not

2006-10-16 Thread Geir Magnusson Jr.
ok - so should we disable Finalizer and PhantomReferenceQueue test since they aren't trustworthy until the fix is done? Pavel Afremov wrote: I' m going look into this. Pavel Afremov. On 10/16/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Well, it just seems to have gotten worse

Re: [drlvm] gc.Finalizer smoke test fails more often than not

2006-10-16 Thread Mikhail Fursov
The problem could be caused by recent magic support added to Jitrino compiler. The only info needed in 'gen_magic()' method is the name of the class by Class_Handle. So if it's possible to return the class name without resolving and loading the class it could be the solution. Pavel, feel free to

Re: [drlvm] gc.Finalizer smoke test fails more often than not

2006-10-16 Thread Pavel Pervov
Geir, please, look for thread titled [dlrvm] ClassCircularityError in recursive compilation (Was: Re: [drlvm] smoke test : gc PhantomReferenceQueueTest is really unstable) (and original thread [drlvm] smoke test : gc PhantomReferenceQueueTest is really unstable). There were huge discussion about

Re: [drlvm] gc.Finalizer smoke test fails more often than not

2006-10-16 Thread Gregory Shimansky
On Monday 16 October 2006 21:27 Ivan Volosyuk wrote: AFAIK, nobody does. This is the problem described by Pavel Pervov with incorrect detection of ClassCircularityError and cyclic class resolution because of compilation. The problem is discussed here [1]. Pavel was going to create a pure Java

Re: [drlvm] gc.Finalizer smoke test fails more often than not

2006-10-16 Thread Gregory Shimansky
On Monday 16 October 2006 21:36 Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: ok - so should we disable Finalizer and PhantomReferenceQueue test since they aren't trustworthy until the fix is done? I was going to talk about excluding tests. I'll create a separate thread. -- Gregory Shimansky, Intel Middleware

Re: [drlvm] gc.Finalizer smoke test fails more often than not

2006-10-16 Thread Geir Magnusson Jr.
I already did. Got sick of it. Gregory Shimansky wrote: On Monday 16 October 2006 21:36 Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: ok - so should we disable Finalizer and PhantomReferenceQueue test since they aren't trustworthy until the fix is done? I was going to talk about excluding tests. I'll create a