I think this looks good. I added serviceability-dev to the mailing list.
Coleen
On 11/10/15 2:18 PM, Rachel Protacio wrote:
Good point. I have changed Develop to DevelopInfo. I think it's better
to maintain the same levels of levels on the develop side so that the
logging can just shift laterally to non-product, as it were.
And yes, they are specified as -Xlog:<tag>=develop_debug
Updated webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rprotacio/8142366.01/
I re-tested with logging jtreg tests and ExecuteInternalVMTests test,
and for anyone who was curious (namely Max who had the good idea for
me to check), the debug levels do correctly "nest" with more verbose
ones printing out the less verbose and product mode logging as well.
Thanks,
Rachel
On 11/9/2015 6:05 PM, Coleen Phillimore wrote:
Hi Rachel,
I sort of thought DevelopDebug would replace plain Develop, and
DevelopTrace would be additional lower level. Maybe plain Develop
should be DevelopInfo then?
Another question - how do you specify these levels? Is it
-Xlog:itables=develop_debug ?
Thanks,
Coleen
On 11/9/15 5:55 PM, Rachel Protacio wrote:
Hello,
Please see my small changeset to add two develop levels to UL.
Summary: This adds develop (that is, non-product) logging levels to
the Unified Logging framework in order to support performance,
footprint, and usefulness-of-output considerations while maintaining
the ability for the user to specify levels of verbosity, i.e.
default, "debug," and "trace" levels.
Open webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rprotacio/8142366/
Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8142366
I tested the added levels locally with sample log messages to ensure
proper functioning. When I convert future tags to logging with these
levels, those tags will have their own tests and inherently exercise
the added levels.
Thank you,
Rachel
