RFR(M) 8152988: [AOT] Update test batch definitions to include aot-ed java.base module mode into hs-comp testing

Erik Joelsson erik.joelsson at oracle.com
Fri Oct 19 16:04:25 UTC 2018


I will answer the parts I'm responsible for.

On 2018-10-19 00:21, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
> In RunTests.gmk, the following line is repeated:
> # Note, this could not be done during JDK build time.
> In the options:
> $1_JAOTC_OPTS := \
> -J-Xmx4g --info \
> -Xmx4g is huge, much larger than what we typically use. Is this 
> intentional? This will risk crashing at machines with too little free 
> memory. Will AOT fail to work with less memory?
> There's an extra space before the comma here:
> $$(addprefix --compile-commands , $$($1_AOT_CCLIST)) \
> Question (to Erik, I presume): the idea of addprefix here is that 
> AOT_CCLIST can be empty, and this was a convenient way to just add 
> "--compile-commands <the list file>" if it exists? I was a bit 
> confounded at first since normally we only use it for distributing a 
> prefix over multiple items, and I could see no way for AOT_CCLIST to 
> ever be more than one item.
Yes, that was the intention. I often use addprefix that way and find it 
convenient that it seamlessly handles 0-N number of elements in the 
argument without the need for cumbersome conditionals. The extra space 
is needed in this case but should perhaps be explicit using $(SPACE).
> About this:
> # Note, ExecuteWithLog doesn't play well with with two calls in the 
> same recipe.
> $$(info $$(JDK_IMAGE_DIR)/bin/java $$($1_JVM_OPTIONS) -XX:+PrintAOT 
> -XX:AOTLibrary=$$@ -version)
> $$(FIXPATH) $$(JDK_IMAGE_DIR)/bin/java \
> $$($1_JVM_OPTIONS) \
> -XX:+PrintAOT -XX:AOTLibrary=$$@ -version
> First, what is the purpose of this? Is it to verify that the generated 
> AOT library works? This will result in a lot of "java -version" being 
> printed at the time when running tests. Perhaps the output should be 
> redirected? (Assuming that java exists with a non-zero exit value if 
> things fail, but if it does not, I'm not sure how this would help 
> otherwise.)
My guess is that they want diagnostics saved in case tests fail.
> Second, there's no problem to use multiple ExecuteWithLog in the same 
> recipe, however, the base variable needs to be different. E.g:
> $$(call ExecuteWithLog, $$@_verify, \
> $$(FIXPATH) $$(JDK_IMAGE_DIR)/bin/java \
> 	    ...
The issue I'm referring to is that the $(info) line in ExecuteWithLog 
will print the commands first, then execute the first line of the 
recipe. This makes the output confusing since both of those commands 
print (what I'm assuming is) relevant diagnostics information. This is 
simply a consequence of using $(info) for printing the command line. 
Make will evaluate all the recipe lines first, then execute them one by 
one. To be clear, it ends up like this:

Executing [jaotc ...]
Executing [java ...]
<output from jaotc>
<output from java>
> Further,
> SetupAot = $(NamedParamsMacroTemplate)
> define SetupAotBody
> ifneq ($$($1_MODULES), )
> ...
> If think it would be clearer if the if-test is on the call site for 
> SetupAot instead. Now it's unconditionally called, but does nothing if 
> AOT is not used. I think that looks odd.
My goal was to minimize the repeated code at each call site. While 
developing this, I had a lot more duplication at first, and it was a 
hassle to update each location every time I needed to change something. 
Other than that I don't feel strongly for either construct.
> And here,
> - run-test-$1: clean-workdir-$1 $(TEST_PREREQS)
> + run-test-$1: clean-workdir-$1 $$($1_AOT_TARGETS)
> I don't think you can just remove TEST_PREREQS like that..? (The same 
> goes for the other run-test-$1 instance.)
I added the TEST_PREREQS variable to support the CDS archive generation, 
which was recently removed. With the way SetupAot turned out to need 
separate calls from each SetupTestRun, the global TEST_PREREQS wasn't 
suitable. I don't know of any current need for a general TEST_PREREQS.
> Finally:
> + $$(addprefix -vmoption:, $$($1_AOT_OPTIONS)) \
> I'm not really comfortable with this use of addprefix. I think a 
> construct like:
> ifneq ($$($1_AOT_OPTIONS), )
>    $1_JTREG_BASIC_OPTIONS += -vmoption:$$($1_AOT_OPTIONS)
> endif
> would be much clearar. Ideally, I'd like to see the same construct in 
> the SetupAotModule function as well, but that's not as important.
I agree.

> The rest of the build changes look good. (I can't say anything about 
> the test/**/*-list.txt files.)
> /Magnus
>> testing: Tested by running subset of hotspot, jdk and jck tests with 
>> TEST_OPTS_AOT_MODULES=java.base jdk.internal.vm.compiler
>>          with "make run-test" and in Mach5.
>> thanks,
>> -katya
>> p.s.
>>  Thanks a lot Erik for huge help with porting original patch done in 
>> old testing framework (test/TestCommon.gmk)
>>  to new one (make/RunTests*).

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-compiler-dev/attachments/20181019/5693346c/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the hotspot-compiler-dev mailing list