On 1/02/2018 5:01 PM, Jini George wrote:
Hello Daniel,
Your fix looks good to me. You probably could instead add 'remove()' or
'run()' to the list, but I leave it upto you.
These tests should only be looking for things that are guaranteed to be
seen. If waitForReferencePendingList is not there, how do we know that
processPendingReferences will be there? We seem to be assuming a
quiescent system. We know the threads that will be present, but the only
stack entries we should be looking for are those controlled by the test
code itself.
David
-----
Thanks,
Jini (Not a (R)eviewer).
On 2/1/2018 2:39 AM, stewartd.qdt wrote:
Please review this webrev [1] which attempts to fix a test error in
serviceability/sa/ClhsdbWhere.java when it is run under an AArch64
system (not necessarily exclusive to this system, but it was the
system under test). The bug report [2] provides further details and
has the jtr report that was generated. Essentially the line
“waitForReferencePendingList” never actually occurs. The test is
written such that it is expecting that line.
This patch simply removes the line from the set of tested lines it
expects. I’m not overly happy with this approach as it actually
removes a test line. However, the test line does not actually appear
in the output (at least on my system) and I’m not sure if there is
actually another way of testing for the intent of this line or if it
doesn’t actually have to appear in the output, depending on the
system. Perhaps the original author could chime in and provide further
guidance as to the intention of the test.
I am happy to modify the patch as necessary.
Regards,
Daniel Stewart
[1] - http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dstewart/8196521/webrev.00/
[2] - https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8196521
