Does anybody know if there are any tests that verify the actual contents
of the dump?
/Mikael
On 2012-05-02 14:08, Nils Loodin wrote:
On May 2, 2012, at 14:00 , David Holmes wrote:
Hi Nils,
On 2/05/2012 9:56 PM, Nils Loodin wrote:
Ignoring Windows (with prints very little) I'd say it is the printing of
/proc/meminfo that is the main difference. Not sure why printing that was
necessary ... but if we are going to remove it I think we need to know why it
was added.
Yes, that's the reason.
Note that nothing is removed. The method still prints exactly the same info,
but I introduced another method to print briefer info, to be kinder to tool
developers.
The current one prints /proc/meminfo. You turned that code into
print_full_memory_info but in the main routine you call print_memory_info. Was
that a mistake?
YES! Glad you caught that :) Guess (or hope) it would have been caught in dump
testing otherwise :)
Regards,
Nils Loodin
David
I really don't want to change the output for say, hs_err files, where I believe
this info is used.
This can make it hard for tool writers to get a summary that look good and
similar for multiple platforms (sizing of gui fields, having to parse info in
the tool code etc)
Lookin at the code, it's in some serious need of refactoring. It would be nice with a
method to get a "brief" os info for these kinds of tools that looks similar on
all platforms.
This is my suggested change:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~nloodin/7165755/webrev.00/
Seems to me some of this could be factored into the top-level OS class if we
shoehorn Windows into the same shape as the other OSes ;-)
This was my first attempt also, but then a lot of empty windows-methods ensued,
which was kind of ugly.
Or at least perhaps put some of the common stuff into os_posix.cpp ?
There's a thought!
I'll investigate that route, it could get things to look nicer.
Cheers,
David
Regards,
Nils Loodin
