8269087: CheckSegmentedCodeCache test fails in an emulated-client VM #4540

mychris · 2021-06-21T14:31:39Z

Progress

Change must not contain extraneous whitespace
Commit message must refer to an issue
Change must be properly reviewed

Issue

JDK-8269087: CheckSegmentedCodeCache test fails in an emulated-client VM

Reviewers

Igor Veresov (@veresov - Reviewer)
Vladimir Kozlov (@vnkozlov - Reviewer)

Reviewing

Using git

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk pull/4540/head:pull/4540
$ git checkout pull/4540

Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/4540
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk pull/4540/head

Using Skara CLI tools

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 4540

View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 4540

Using diff file

Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/4540.diff

bridgekeeper · 2021-06-21T14:32:59Z

👋 Welcome back cgo! 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 · 2021-06-21T14:35:34Z

@mychris The following label will be automatically applied to this pull request:

hotspot-compiler

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

mlbridge · 2021-06-21T14:53:45Z

Webrevs

01: Full - Incremental (bafae63f)
00: Full (f63ba676)

veresov

Under what circumstances does the VM print "-XX:+TieredCompilation not supported in this VM" ? Is it still really possible?

mychris · 2021-06-22T06:51:26Z

After thinking a bit more about this, I guess it is irrelevant if the VM does still print the warning or not. It might if neither C1, nor C2 is compiled into it, so maybe in a zero VM?

But if I understand the test correctly, the reason for checking for this error message is, that certain checks should only be done if C2 is present, so I guess the newly added check should be enough to catch all cases.

But maybe I am misunderstanding the test, because if that is the case, then why isn't the test simply tagged as requires c2?

…r not.

mychris · 2021-06-22T08:13:04Z

I changed the test to use the Platform class to check if tiered compilation is supported or not. The test case should now behave the same as it has before, but the check is more robust and works in an emulated-client as well.

veresov

I ran this through internal testing. All clean.

veresov · 2021-06-23T18:16:59Z

test/hotspot/jtreg/compiler/codecache/CheckSegmentedCodeCache.java

@@ -58,7 +58,7 @@ private static void verifySegmentedCodeCache(ProcessBuilder pb, boolean enabled)
                out.shouldContain(NON_METHOD);
            } catch (RuntimeException e) {
                // Check if TieredCompilation is disabled (in a client VM)
-                if (!out.getOutput().contains("-XX:+TieredCompilation not supported in this VM")) {
+                if (Platform.isTieredSupported()) {


That's probably not a complete set of conditions of when the segmented code cache is disabled. But if it solves the current issue, I think that's fine.

openjdk · 2021-06-23T18:19:18Z

@mychris 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:

8269087: CheckSegmentedCodeCache test fails in an emulated-client VM

Reviewed-by: iveresov, kvn

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 45 new commits pushed to the master branch:

7c31903: 8267075: jcmd VM.cds should print directory of the output files
e515873: 8269216: Useless initialization in com/sun/crypto/provider/PBES2Parameters.java
51d9159: 8236212: CompiledMethodLoad and CompiledMethodUnload events can be posted in START phase
280f2d5: 8268433: serviceability/dcmd/framework/VMVersionTest.java fails with Unable to send object throw not established PipeIO Listener Thread connection
f375916: 8269186: [REDO] Remove CodeCache::mark_for_evol_deoptimization() method
7621fa3: 8268464: Remove dependancy of TestHttpsServer, HttpTransaction, HttpCallback from open/test/jdk/sun/net/www/protocol/https/ tests
f3ba269: 8256306: ObjectMonitor::_contentions field should not be 'jint'
52d5d1b: 8269188: [BACKOUT] Remove CodeCache::mark_for_evol_deoptimization() method
f2e690e: 8268720: Unspecified checks on NameAndType constants should not be performed
2c29d79: 8269206: A small typo in comment in test/lib/sun/hotspot/WhiteBox.java
... and 35 more: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/compare/b7d78a5b661e2b00f271298db3b6cc873cf754e7...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.

As you do not have Committer status in this project an existing Committer must agree to sponsor your change. Possible candidates are the reviewers of this PR (@veresov, @vnkozlov) but any other Committer may sponsor as well.

➡️ To flag this PR as ready for integration with the above commit message, type /integrate in a new comment. (Afterwards, your sponsor types /sponsor in a new comment to perform the integration).

mychris · 2021-06-24T12:43:36Z

Thanks for the review, Igor. Is this trivial enough or do I need a second reviewer?

mychris · 2021-06-24T15:52:48Z

Thanks for the review.
/integrate

openjdk · 2021-06-24T15:54:21Z

@mychris
Your change (at version bafae63) is now ready to be sponsored by a Committer.

veresov · 2021-06-24T16:48:35Z

/sponsor

openjdk · 2021-06-24T16:49:51Z

Going to push as commit 595446b.
Since your change was applied there have been 45 commits pushed to the master branch:

7c31903: 8267075: jcmd VM.cds should print directory of the output files
e515873: 8269216: Useless initialization in com/sun/crypto/provider/PBES2Parameters.java
51d9159: 8236212: CompiledMethodLoad and CompiledMethodUnload events can be posted in START phase
280f2d5: 8268433: serviceability/dcmd/framework/VMVersionTest.java fails with Unable to send object throw not established PipeIO Listener Thread connection
f375916: 8269186: [REDO] Remove CodeCache::mark_for_evol_deoptimization() method
7621fa3: 8268464: Remove dependancy of TestHttpsServer, HttpTransaction, HttpCallback from open/test/jdk/sun/net/www/protocol/https/ tests
f3ba269: 8256306: ObjectMonitor::_contentions field should not be 'jint'
52d5d1b: 8269188: [BACKOUT] Remove CodeCache::mark_for_evol_deoptimization() method
f2e690e: 8268720: Unspecified checks on NameAndType constants should not be performed
2c29d79: 8269206: A small typo in comment in test/lib/sun/hotspot/WhiteBox.java
... and 35 more: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/compare/b7d78a5b661e2b00f271298db3b6cc873cf754e7...master

Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts.

openjdk · 2021-06-24T16:50:06Z

@veresov @mychris Pushed as commit 595446b.

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

Fixes test for emulated-client VMs.

f63ba67

openjdk bot added hotspot-compiler hotspot-compiler-dev@openjdk.org rfr Pull request is ready for review labels Jun 21, 2021

veresov reviewed Jun 21, 2021

View reviewed changes

Use the Platform class from testlib to check if tiered is supported o…

bafae63

…r not.

veresov approved these changes Jun 23, 2021

View reviewed changes

openjdk bot added the ready Pull request is ready to be integrated label Jun 23, 2021

vnkozlov approved these changes Jun 24, 2021

View reviewed changes

openjdk bot added the sponsor Pull request is ready to be sponsored label Jun 24, 2021

openjdk bot closed this Jun 24, 2021

openjdk bot added integrated Pull request has been integrated and removed ready Pull request is ready to be integrated rfr Pull request is ready for review sponsor Pull request is ready to be sponsored labels Jun 24, 2021

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Uh oh!

8269087: CheckSegmentedCodeCache test fails in an emulated-client VM #4540

8269087: CheckSegmentedCodeCache test fails in an emulated-client VM #4540

Uh oh!

mychris commented Jun 21, 2021 •

edited by openjdk bot

Loading

Uh oh!

bridgekeeper bot commented Jun 21, 2021

Uh oh!

openjdk bot commented Jun 21, 2021

Uh oh!

mlbridge bot commented Jun 21, 2021 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

veresov left a comment

Uh oh!

mychris commented Jun 22, 2021

Uh oh!

mychris commented Jun 22, 2021

Uh oh!

veresov left a comment

Uh oh!

veresov Jun 23, 2021 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

openjdk bot commented Jun 23, 2021 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

mychris commented Jun 24, 2021

Uh oh!

mychris commented Jun 24, 2021

Uh oh!

openjdk bot commented Jun 24, 2021

Uh oh!

veresov commented Jun 24, 2021

Uh oh!

openjdk bot commented Jun 24, 2021

Uh oh!

openjdk bot commented Jun 24, 2021

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

8269087: CheckSegmentedCodeCache test fails in an emulated-client VM #4540

8269087: CheckSegmentedCodeCache test fails in an emulated-client VM #4540

Uh oh!

Conversation

mychris commented Jun 21, 2021 • edited by openjdk bot Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Progress

Issue

Reviewers

Reviewing

Uh oh!

bridgekeeper bot commented Jun 21, 2021

Uh oh!

openjdk bot commented Jun 21, 2021

Uh oh!

mlbridge bot commented Jun 21, 2021 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Webrevs

Uh oh!

veresov left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

mychris commented Jun 22, 2021

Uh oh!

mychris commented Jun 22, 2021

Uh oh!

veresov left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

veresov Jun 23, 2021 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

openjdk bot commented Jun 23, 2021 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

mychris commented Jun 24, 2021

Uh oh!

mychris commented Jun 24, 2021

Uh oh!

openjdk bot commented Jun 24, 2021

Uh oh!

veresov commented Jun 24, 2021

Uh oh!

openjdk bot commented Jun 24, 2021

Uh oh!

openjdk bot commented Jun 24, 2021

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

mychris commented Jun 21, 2021 •

edited by openjdk bot

Loading

mlbridge bot commented Jun 21, 2021 •

edited

Loading

veresov Jun 23, 2021 •

edited

Loading

openjdk bot commented Jun 23, 2021 •

edited

Loading