8352276: Skip jtreg tests using native executable with libjvm.so/libjli.so dependencies on static JDK

[jianglizhou]

Please review this PR that adds @requires !jdk.static to tests, thanks.

• runtime/StackGap/TestStackGap.java
• runtime/StackGuardPages/TestStackGuardPages.java
• runtime/TLS/TestTLS.java
• runtime/jni/daemonDestroy/TestDaemonDestroy.java
• runtime/jni/getCreatedJavaVMs/TestGetCreatedJavaVMs.java
• jdk/java/lang/reflect/exeCallerAccessTest/CallerAccessTest.java
• jdk/jni/nullCaller/NullCallerTest.java
• jdk/tools/launcher/JniInvocationTest.java

These tests use native executables that have dependencies on libjvm.so, libjli.so, etc. Static JDK does not provide the separate JDK/VM shared libraries, hence cannot support the specific testing mode.

---

Progress

• Change must be properly reviewed (1 review required, with at least 1 Reviewer)
• Change must not contain extraneous whitespace
• Commit message must refer to an issue

Issue

• JDK-8352276: Skip jtreg tests using native executable with libjvm.so/libjli.so dependencies on static JDK (Bug - P4)

Reviewers

• David Holmes (@dholmes-ora - Reviewer)

Reviewing

Using git

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/24103/head:pull/24103
$ git checkout pull/24103

Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/24103
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/24103/head

Using Skara CLI tools

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 24103

View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 24103

Using diff file

Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/24103.diff

Using Webrev

Link to Webrev Comment

[bridgekeeper]

👋 Welcome back jiangli! A progress list of the required criteria for merging this PR into master will be added to the body of your pull request. There are additional pull request commands available for use with this pull request.

[openjdk]

@jianglizhou This change now passes all automated pre-integration checks.

ℹ️ This project also has non-automated pre-integration requirements. Please see the file CONTRIBUTING.md for details.

After integration, the commit message for the final commit will be:

8352276: Skip jtreg tests using native executable with libjvm.so/libjli.so dependencies on static JDK

Reviewed-by: dholmes

You can use pull request commands such as /summary, /contributor and /issue to adjust it as needed.

At the time when this comment was updated there had been 21 new commits pushed to the master branch:

• fb210e3: 8351952: [IR Framework]: allow ignoring methods that are not compilable
• 3ed010a: 8352020: [CompileFramework] enable compilation for VectorAPI
• a5d06a1: 8352249: Remove incidental whitespace in traditional doc comments
• 74df384: 8352428: GenShen: Old-gen cycles are still looping
• fcc2a24: 8350813: Rendering of bulky sound bank from MIDI sequence can cause OutOfMemoryError
• ac3ad03: 8350589: Investigate cleaner implementation of AArch64 ML-DSA intrinsic introduced in JDK-8348561
• 8a1c85e: 8350898: Shenandoah: Eliminate final roots safepoint
• 8e999b8: 8351969: Add Public Identifiers to the JDK built-in Catalog
• c7f3338: 8352109: java/awt/Desktop/MailTest.java fails in platforms where Action.MAIL is not supported
• fed34e4: 8351933: Inaccurate masking of TC subfield decrement in ForkJoinPool
• ... and 11 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/b025d8c2e062210b6148da43f11517666b0b4932...master

As there are no conflicts, your changes will automatically be rebased on top of these commits when integrating. If you prefer to avoid this automatic rebasing, please check the documentation for the /integrate command for further details.

➡️ To integrate this PR with the above commit message to the master branch, type /integrate in a new comment.

[openjdk]

@jianglizhou The following labels will be automatically applied to this pull request:

• core-libs
• hotspot-runtime

When this pull request is ready to be reviewed, an "RFR" email will be sent to the corresponding mailing lists. If you would like to change these labels, use the /label pull request command.

[mlbridge]

Webrevs

• 00: Full (9bc38889)

[dholmes-ora]

@jianglizhou shouldn't these native executables be built differently to work with the static JDK? Otherwise how does a user create a native executable that launches the JVM?

[jianglizhou]

@jianglizhou shouldn't these native executables be built differently to work with the static JDK? Otherwise how does a user create a native executable that launches the JVM?

I think it's the case of using customized launcher and we need to implement new tests to cover for the static support. The test needs to build native (testing launcher) executable by statically linking with the needed JDK and VM static libraries. We haven't discussed this topic in the hermetic Java meetings yet. I think some build system work is needed so the JDK/VM static libraries would also be built when creating the test native binaries. We probably want to add a new test-static-image for that purpose, so building the existing test-image target is not affected and does not require the static libraries. I'll create a new RFE for this.

[jianglizhou]

I filed https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8352305.

[AlanBateman]

@jianglizhou shouldn't these native executables be built differently to work with the static JDK? Otherwise how does a user create a native executable that launches the JVM?

Right now, jlink creating a modular run-time image, can generate a launch script in the image bin directory. If/when support for creating a static image comes then it will generate a native executable that runs the application. Configuration that is provided at launch time may need to be provided at link time. In that world then it's not clear if there is a real need for custom launcher code. As Jiangli says, we haven't discussed this yet, so can't rule anything in or out right now.

[jianglizhou]

can't rule anything in or out right now

+1

@AlanBateman @dholmes-ora Does it look reasonable to not run these tests on static JDK for now?

[dholmes-ora]

Okay - disabling these tests for now seems prudent. Thanks

[jianglizhou]

Thanks, @dholmes-ora!

[jianglizhou]

/integrate

[openjdk]

Going to push as commit 91836e1.
Since your change was applied there have been 24 commits pushed to the master branch:

• 2560a63: 8352131: [REDO] C2: Print compilation bailouts with PrintCompilation compile command
• 73177d9: 8347734: Turning off PerfData logging doesn't work
• 96305e0: 4466930: JTable.selectAll boundary handling
• fb210e3: 8351952: [IR Framework]: allow ignoring methods that are not compilable
• 3ed010a: 8352020: [CompileFramework] enable compilation for VectorAPI
• a5d06a1: 8352249: Remove incidental whitespace in traditional doc comments
• 74df384: 8352428: GenShen: Old-gen cycles are still looping
• fcc2a24: 8350813: Rendering of bulky sound bank from MIDI sequence can cause OutOfMemoryError
• ac3ad03: 8350589: Investigate cleaner implementation of AArch64 ML-DSA intrinsic introduced in JDK-8348561
• 8a1c85e: 8350898: Shenandoah: Eliminate final roots safepoint
• ... and 14 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/b025d8c2e062210b6148da43f11517666b0b4932...master

Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts.

[openjdk]

@jianglizhou Pushed as commit 91836e1.

💡 You may see a message that your pull request was closed with unmerged commits. This can be safely ignored.