Hi Gary,
As I see currently multiple tests already use the patterns that in fact are
localized messages, e.g. for 'Breakpoint hit' the following tests expect to
find this message in the JDB output.
grep -rn 'Breakpoint hit' open/test/jdk/com/sun/jdi/
open/test/jdk/com/sun/jdi//JdbMissStep.java:82:
.shouldContain("Breakpoint hit");
open/test/jdk/com/sun/jdi//JdbExprTest.java:73:
.shouldContain("Breakpoint hit");
open/test/jdk/com/sun/jdi//JdbVarargsTest.java:98:
.shouldMatch("Breakpoint hit:.*varString\\(\\)");
open/test/jdk/com/sun/jdi//lib/jdb/Jdb.java:81: public static final String
BREAKPOINT_HIT = "Breakpoint hit:";
open/test/jdk/com/sun/jdi//JdbMethodExitTest.java:204:
.shouldContain("Breakpoint hit");
open/test/jdk/com/sun/jdi//JdbMethodExitTest.java:303:
.shouldContain("Breakpoint hit");
If we really want to get rid of this (e.g. for the cases when these tests are
run with non-default English locale), I would suggest to file a separate issue
for that rather than addressing it in the current fix.
Best regards,
Daniil
On 10/22/18, 4:50 AM, "Gary Adams" <[email protected]> wrote:
Thanks for making the extra effort to avoid dependency on
the simple prompt matching. One thing to check with the
large reply matches - make sure the locale translated messages
do not interfere with the compiled pattern matching.
See MessageOutput.format().
On 10/19/18, 7:01 PM, Daniil Titov wrote:
> Hi Chris,
>
> Please review an updated version of the fix that makes the tests to use a
custom pattern while waiting for the command to complete.
>
> Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dtitov/8211736/webrev.05/
> Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8211736
>
> Thanks!
> --Daniil
>
>
> On 10/19/18, 12:55 PM, "Chris Plummer"<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On 10/19/18 9:47 AM, Daniil Titov wrote:
> > Hi Gary and Chris,
> >
> > I am resending the previous email since the table in that email
got corrupted.
> >
> > Below is what output jdb prints when a breakpoint is hit
depending on what suspended policy is used:
> >
> > The current behavior.
> > SUSPEND_ALL: Prompt is printed ( e.g. "main[1]"), location is
printed
> > SUSPEND_EVENT_THREAD: Prompt is not printed, location is not
printed
> > SUSPEND_NONE: Prompt is not printed, location is not printed
> >
> > The fix changes this behavior as the following:
> >
> > SUSPEND_ALL: Prompt is printed ( e.g. "main[1]"), location is
printed
> > SUSPEND_EVENT_THREAD: Prompt is printed ( "> "), location is
printed
> > SUSPEND_NONE: Prompt is printed ( "> "), location is printed
> I'm still in favor of this fix.
> >
> >
> > Could you please say is it OK for you or you want that the
location was printed only for SUSPEND_ALL case? Or probably just leave all
behavior unchanged and close the bug as "not an issue"?
> >
> > Regarding settable prompt... As I understand Gary's original
concern was that waiting in tests for a simple prompt "> " (> ) could
be unreliable if this substring somehow appears in the output of the test
program and the suggestion was to use more specific patterns for the cases when
the full prompt (thread_name[frame_index]) is not printed ( e.g. when the
current thread is not set). However, we need somehow pass this pattern to
Jdb.command(JdbCommand) method otherwise it would keep waiting for the full
prompt and fail with the timeout. Probably I am missing something here...
> Maybe we need a version of command() that takes a pattern to look for
> other than the prompt.
>
> Chris
> >
> >
> > Thanks!
> > --Daniil
> >
> > On 10/19/18, 9:27 AM, "Daniil Titov"<[email protected]>
wrote:
> >
> > Hi Gary and Chris,
> >
> > Below is the table that shows what jdb output is printed
when a breakpoint is hit depending on what suspended policy is used:
> >
> > SUSPEND POLICY | PROMPT PRINTED |
LOCATION PRINTED
> > ---------------------------------------
|---------------------------|--------------------------
> > SUSPEND_ALL. | yes, e.g.
"main[1]" | yes
> > ---------------------------------------
|-------------------------- |--------------------------
> > SUSPEND_EVENT_THREAD | no |
no
> >
----------------------------------------|------------------------
--|--------------------------
> > SUSPEND_ALL. | no
| no
> >
> >
> > The fix changes this behavior as the following:
> >
> > SUSPEND POLICY | PROMPT PRINTED. |
LOCATION PRINTED
> > ---------------------------------------
|----------------------------|--------------------------
> > SUSPEND_ALL. | yes , e.g.
"main[1]" | yes
> > ---------------------------------------
|----------------------------|--------------------------
> > SUSPEND_EVENT_THREAD | yes , ">" |
yes
> >
----------------------------------------|---------------------------
|--------------------------
> > SUSPEND_ALL. | yes, ">".
| yes
> >
> > Could you please say is it OK for you or you want that the
location was printed only for SUSPEND_ALL case? Or probably just leave all
behavior unchanged and close the bug as "not an issue"?
> >
> > Regarding settable prompt... As I understand Gary's
original concern was that waiting in tests for a simple prompt "> "
(> ) could be unreliable if this substring somehow appears in the
output of the test program and the suggestion was to use more specific patterns
for the cases when the full prompt (thread_name[frame_index]) is not printed (
e.g. when the current thread is not set). However, we need somehow pass this
pattern to Jdb.command(JdbCommand) method otherwise it would keep waiting for
the full prompt and fail with the timeout. Probably I am missing something
here...
> >
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Daniil
> >
> >
> >
> > On 10/19/18, 12:54 AM,
"[email protected]"<[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > It's not clear to me if the omitted location information
for the non
> > stopping
> > cases was intentional or not. It may be sufficient to
know that the
> > event fired
> > without the extra information.
> >
> > I don't think a settable prompt is required either.
There are plenty of
> > jdb commands that
> > could be used with the wait for message in tests that
need to
> > synchronize at a specific
> > point in the test sequence.
> >
> > I don't think we see wait for simple prompt in any of
the tests, because it
> > is not reliable enough.
> >
> > On 10/18/18 11:53 AM, Daniil Titov wrote:
> > > Hi Gary,
> > >
> > > Currently when a breakpoint is hit the message
"Breakpoint hit:" is printed in the debugger output. What we do in this fix we
just add more information about what exact breakpoint is hit. Do you suggest we
should not print this line at all if suspend policy is SUSPEND_NONE? If so then
it is not clear what is the use of the command "stop go ..." would be.
Regarding waiting for the simple prompt, we could change JDbCommand to have a
field to store a prompt pattern and use this pattern (if it was set) when
waiting for command to complete. In tests when required we would set the
pattern in JdbCommand to more complicated one matching a specific output we are
expecting at this particular step. Do you think it would be a better approach?
> > >
> > > Thanks!
> > >
> > > Best regards,
> > > Daniil
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On 10/18/18, 4:09 AM, "Gary
Adams"<[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > I'm not certain that we should be printing
locations or prompts for
> > > events when the vm has not been suspended. This
looks OK for the
> > > simple test case we are working on here, but in
real life there may
> > > be a lot more output produced.
> > >
> > > The user has to select a specific thread before
additional commands
> > > can be performed in the correct context. e.g.
threads, thread n, where, ...
> > > So the information is available to the user. It
doesn't have to be
> > > produced at the time the event is processed.
> > >
> > > I'm uncomfortable putting too much trust in
waiting for the simple prompt,
> > > because there is too great a chance of false
positives on such a small
> > > marker.
> > >
> > >
> > > On 10/17/18, 8:50 PM, Daniil Titov wrote:
> > > > Hi Chris, Alex and JC,
> > > >
> > > > I created a separate issue to deal with
"non-atomic" jdb output at https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8212626 .
> > > >
> > > > Please review an updated fix that includes
the changes Alex suggested.
> > > >
> > > > Webrev:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dtitov/8211736/webrev.04
> > > > Issue:
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8211736
> > > >
> > > > Thanks!
> > > > --Daniil
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On 10/17/18, 5:06 PM, "Daniil
Titov"<[email protected]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi Chris,
> > > >
> > > > The previous email was accidentally
fired before I managed to type anything in. Sorry for confusion.
> > > >
> > > > Jdb constantly reads new commands from
System.in despite whether the breakpoint is hit and/or the prompt is printed.
> > > >
> > > > cat -n
src/jdk.jdi/share/classes/com/sun/tools/example/debug/tty/TTY.java
> > > >
> > > > 786 // Process
interactive commands.
> > > > 787
MessageOutput.printPrompt();
> > > > 788 while (true) {
> > > > 789 String ln =
in.readLine();
> > > > 790 if (ln == null)
{
> > > > 791 /*
> > > > 792 * Jdb is
being shutdown because debuggee exited, ignore any 'null'
> > > > 793 *
returned by readLine() during shutdown. JDK-8154144.
> > > > 794 */
> > > > 795 if
(!isShuttingDown()) {
> > > > 796
MessageOutput.println("Input stream closed.");
> > > > 797 }
> > > > 798 ln = "quit";
> > > > 799 }
> > > > 800
> > > > 801 if
(ln.startsWith("!!")&& lastLine != null) {
> > > > 802 ln =
lastLine + ln.substring(2);
> > > > 803
MessageOutput.printDirectln(ln);// Special case: use printDirectln()
> > > > 804 }
> > > > 805
> > > > 806 StringTokenizer
t = new StringTokenizer(ln);
> > > > 807 if
(t.hasMoreTokens()) {
> > > > 808 lastLine =
ln;
> > > > 809
executeCommand(t);
> > > > 810 } else {
> > > > 811
MessageOutput.printPrompt();
> > > > 812 }
> > > > 813 }
> > > > 814 } catch
(VMDisconnectedException e) {
> > > > 815
handler.handleDisconnectedException();
> > > > 816 }
> > > >
> > > > Below is a sample debug session for the
following test class that sends commands "threads" and "quit"
> > > > 1 public class LoopTest {
> > > > 2 public static void
main(String[] args) throws Exception {
> > > > 3 Thread thread =
Thread.currentThread();
> > > > 4 while(true) {
> > > > 5 print(thread);
> > > > 6 Thread.sleep(5000);
> > > > 7 }
> > > > 8 }
> > > > 9
> > > > 10 public static void
print(Object obj) {
> > > > 11
//System.out.println(obj);
> > > > 12 }
> > > > 13 }
> > > >
> > > > datitov-mac:work datitov$
~/src/jdk-hs/build/macosx-x64-debug/images/jdk/bin/jdb LoopTest
> > > > Initializing jdb ...
> > > > > stop go at LoopTest:6
> > > > Deferring breakpoint LoopTest:6.
> > > > It will be set after the class is loaded.
> > > > > run
> > > > run LoopTest
> > > > Set uncaught java.lang.Throwable
> > > > Set deferred uncaught java.lang.Throwable
> > > > >
> > > > VM Started: Set deferred breakpoint
LoopTest:6
> > > >
> > > > Breakpoint hit: "thread=main",
LoopTest.main(), line=6 bci=8
> > > > 6 Thread.sleep(5000);
> > > >
> > > > Breakpoint hit: "thread=main",
LoopTest.main(), line=6 bci=8
> > > > 6 Thread.sleep(5000);
> > > > threads
> > > > Group system:
> > > >
(java.lang.ref.Reference$ReferenceHandler)0x172 Reference Handler running
> > > >
(java.lang.ref.Finalizer$FinalizerThread)0x173 Finalizer cond. waiting
> > > > (java.lang.Thread)0x174
Signal Dispatcher running
> > > > Group main:
> > > > (java.lang.Thread)0x1
main sleeping
> > > > Group InnocuousThreadGroup:
> > > >
(jdk.internal.misc.InnocuousThread)0x197 Common-Cleaner cond. waiting
> > > > >
> > > > Breakpoint hit: "thread=main",
LoopTest.main(), line=6 bci=8
> > > > 6 Thread.sleep(5000);
> > > >
> > > > Breakpoint hit: "thread=main",
LoopTest.main(), line=6 bci=8
> > > > 6 Thread.sleep(5000);
> > > > quit
> > > > Breakpoint hit: "thread=main",
LoopTest.main(), line=6 bci=8
> > > > 6 Thread.sleep(5000);
> > > >
> > > > datitov-mac:work datitov$
> > > >
> > > > I think we could print a simple prompt
in this case as Alex suggested.
> > > >
> > > > Best regards,
> > > > Daniil
> > > >
> > > > On 10/17/18, 3:52 PM, "Chris
Plummer"<[email protected]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > What is the jdb state for a
breakpoint with SUSPEND_NONE? Can you
> > > > actually type in commands even
though no threads are suspended?
> > > >
> > > > Chris
> > > >
> > > > On 10/17/18 3:31 PM, Alex Menkov
wrote:
> > > > > Hi Daniil, Chris,
> > > > >
> > > > > As far as I understand, the fix
does not completely fixes all
> > > > > "non-atomic" output issues (at
least TTY.executeCommand still prints
> > > > > prompt separately), so I agree
that handle it as separate issue would
> > > > > be better.
> > > > > Unfortunately I don't know
Gary's ideas for the issue.
> > > > >
> > > > > About the fix for print prompt:
> > > > > 1) TTY.java:
> > > > > + // Print current
location if suspend policy is SUSPEND_NONE
> > > > > I suppose you mean "Print
breakpoint location"
> > > > >
> > > > > 2) Does it make sense to use
printCurrentLocation for
> > > > > SUSPEND_EVENT_THREAD?
> > > > > Is it expected to print
something different from printBreakpointLocation?
> > > > >
> > > > > 3) I don't quite understand why
we don't print simple prompt for
> > > > > SUSPEND_NONE. IIUC jdb can
accept new command in both
> > > > > SUSPEND_EVENT_THREAD and
SUSPEND_NONE cases (prompt shows that jdb
> > > > > waits for next command, right?)
> > > > >
> > > > > 4) JdbStopThreadTest.java
> > > > > New line line in Java regexp is
"\\R"
> > > > >
> > > > > --alex
> > > > >
> > > > > On 10/17/2018 10:47, Chris
Plummer wrote:
> > > > >> Hi Alex,
> > > > >>
> > > > >> I think the tty buffering
should be a separate bug fix, and I'd also
> > > > >> like input from Gary on it
since he had tried something similar at
> > > > >> one point. It should probably
also include a multithread test to
> > > > >> prove the fix is working (after
first getting the test to fail
> > > > >> without the changes).
> > > > >>
> > > > >> thanks,
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Chris
> > > > >>
> > > > >> On 10/16/18 8:59 PM, Daniil
Titov wrote:
> > > > >>> Hi Alex, Chris and JC,
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Please review an updated
version of the patch that addresses these
> > > > >>> issues.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Webrev:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dtitov/8211736/webrev.03/
> > > > >>> Issue:
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8211736
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Thanks!
> > > > >>> --Daniil
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> On 10/12/18, 9:52 AM, "Alex
Menkov"<[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Hi Daniil,
> > > > >>> 1) +1 for
printCurrentLocation when suspendPolicy != SUSPEND_ALL
> > > > >>> 2) wrong indent in
JdbStopThreadTest.java:
> > > > >>> 36 import
lib.jdb.JdbCommand;
> > > > >>> 37 import
lib.jdb.JdbTest;
> > > > >>> 3) I think it would be
better to make waitForSimplePrompt
> > > > >>> property of
> > > > >>> JdbCommand (like
JdbCommand.allowExit)
> > > > >>>
jdb.command(JdbCommand.run().replyIsSimplePrompt());
> > > > >>> looks much clearer than
> > > > >>>
jdb.command(JdbCommand.run(), true);
> > > > >>> 4) (TTY.java)
> > > > >>>
MessageOutput.lnprint("Breakpoint hit:");
> > > > >>> + // Print current
location and prompt if suspend policy is
> > > > >>> SUSPEND_EVENT_THREAD.
> > > > >>> + // In case of
SUSPEND_ALL policy this is handled by
> > > > >>> vmInterrupted()
> > > > >>> method.
> > > > >>> + if
(be.request().suspendPolicy() ==
> > > > >>>
EventRequest.SUSPEND_EVENT_THREAD) {
> > > > >>> +
printCurrentLocation(ThreadInfo.getThreadInfo(be.thread()));
> > > > >>> +
MessageOutput.printPrompt();
> > > > >>> + }
> > > > >>> We have 3 separate
outputs.
> > > > >>> If we have several
concurrent threads, we can easy get mess of
> > > > >>> outputs
> > > > >>> from different threads.
> > > > >>> I think it would be
better to print everything in a single chunk.
> > > > >>> I suppose TTY has other
places with similar "non-atomic"
> > > > >>> output, so
> > > > >>> maybe revising TTY output
should be handled by separate issue.
> > > > >>> --alex
> > > > >>> On 10/11/2018 22:00,
Chris Plummer wrote:
> > > > >>> > Hi Daniil,
> > > > >>> >
> > > > >>> > Can you send output
from an example jdb session?
> > > > >>> >
> > > > >>> > Do you think maybe we
should also call printCurrentLocation()
> > > > >>> when the
> > > > >>> > suspend policy is
NONE?
> > > > >>> >
> > > > >>> > There's a typo in the
following line. The space is on the
> > > > >>> wrong side of
> > > > >>> > the comma.
> > > > >>> >
> > > > >>> > 72
jdb.command(JdbCommand.stopThreadAt(DEBUGGEE_CLASS
> > > > >>> ,bpLine));
> > > > >>> >
> > > > >>> > thanks,
> > > > >>> >
> > > > >>> > Chris
> > > > >>> >
> > > > >>> > On 10/11/18 8:02 PM,
Daniil Titov wrote:
> > > > >>> >>
> > > > >>> >> Thank you, JC!
> > > > >>> >>
> > > > >>> >> Please review an
updated version of the patch that fixes
> > > > >>> newly added
> > > > >>> >> test for Windows
platform (now it uses system dependent line
> > > > >>> >> separator string).
> > > > >>> >>
> > > > >>> >>
Webrev:http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dtitov/8211736/webrev.02/
> > > > >>> >>
<http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Edtitov/8211736/webrev.02/>
> > > > >>> >>
> > > > >>> >> Issue:
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8211736
> > > > >>> >>
> > > > >>> >> Best regards,
> > > > >>> >>
> > > > >>> >> --Daniil
> > > > >>> >>
> > > > >>> >> *From: *JC
Beyler<[email protected]>
> > > > >>> >> *Date: *Thursday,
October 11, 2018 at 7:17 PM
> > > > >>> >> *To:
*<[email protected]>
> > > > >>> >> *Cc:
*<[email protected]>
> > > > >>> >> *Subject: *Re: RFR
8211736: jdb doesn't print prompt when
> > > > >>> breakpoint
> > > > >>> >> is hit and suspend
policy is STOP_EVENT_THREAD
> > > > >>> >>
> > > > >>> >> Hi Daniil,
> > > > >>> >>
> > > > >>> >> Looks good to me. I
saw a really small nit:
> > > > >>> >>
> > > > >>> >>
> > > > >>>
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dtitov/8211736/webrev.01/test/jdk/com/sun/jdi/JdbStopThreadTest.java.html
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> >>
> > > > >>>
<http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Edtitov/8211736/webrev.01/test/jdk/com/sun/jdi/JdbStopThreadTest.java.html>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> >>
> > > > >>> >> 70
jdb.command(JdbCommand.stopThreadAt( DEBUGGEE_CLASS
> > > > >>> ,bpLine));
> > > > >>> >>
> > > > >>> >> There is a space
after the '('.
> > > > >>> >>
> > > > >>> >> No need to send a
new webrev for that evidently :),
> > > > >>> >>
> > > > >>> >> Jc
> > > > >>> >>
> > > > >>> >> On Thu, Oct 11, 2018
at 5:07 PM Daniil Titov
> > > > >>> >>
<[email protected]
> > > > >>>
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> > > > >>> >>
> > > > >>> >> Please review
the change that fixes the issue with
> > > > >>> missing prompt
> > > > >>> >> in jdb when a
breakpoint is hit and the suspend policy
> > > > >>> is set to
> > > > >>> >> stop the thread
only.
> > > > >>> >>
> > > > >>> >> Webrev:
> > > > >>>
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dtitov/8211736/webrev.01
> > > > >>> >>
<http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Edtitov/8211736/webrev.01>
> > > > >>> >> Issue:
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8211736
> > > > >>> >>
> > > > >>> >> Thanks!
> > > > >>> >> --Daniil
> > > > >>> >>
> > > > >>> >>
> > > > >>> >>
> > > > >>> >> --
> > > > >>> >>
> > > > >>> >> Thanks,
> > > > >>> >>
> > > > >>> >> Jc
> > > > >>> >>
> > > > >>> >
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
