harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Alexey Varlamov" <alexey.v.varla...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [DRLVM] General stability
Date Tue, 07 Nov 2006 06:48:48 GMT
2006/11/7, Gregory Shimansky <gshimansky@gmail.com>:
> Weldon Washburn wrote:
> > Folks,
> >
> > I have spent the last two months committing patches to the VM.  While we
> > have added a ton of much needed functionality, the stability of the system
> > has been ignored.  By chance, I looked at thread synchronization design
> > problems this week.  Its very apparent that  we lack the regression testing
> > to really find threading bugs, test the fixes and test against regression.
> > No doubt there are similar problems in other VM subsystems.   "build test"
> > is necessary but not sufficient for where we need to go.  In a sense,
> > committing code with only "build test" to prevent regression is the
> > equivalent to flying in the fog without instrumentation.
> >
> > So that we can get engineers focused on stability, I am thinking of coding
> > the JIRAs that involve new features as "later" or even "won't fix".  Please
> > feel free to comment.
> >
> > We also need to restart the old email threads on regression tests.  For
> > example, we need some sort of automated test script that runs Eclipse and
> > tomcat, etc. in a deterministic fashion so that we can compare test
> > results.  It does not have to be perfect for starts, just repeatable and
> > easy to use.  Feel free to beat me to starting these threads :)
>
> In my experience on working with drlvm, stability problems are often
> discovered on the existing VM acceptance tests. Big applications like
> eclipse or tomcat with long workloads usually reveal problems like lack
> of class unloading unless they crash on something like threading
> problems. The acceptance VM tests that we have already are a good start
> to test stability if they are ran nonstop many times.
>
Gregory,

But do we have needed scripts/tools readily available to run and
analyze such stability testing? I'm also pretty sure existing c-unit
and smoke tests would help to reveal certain problems if run
repeatedly - just need to add this stuff to CC and run it nightly.
Anybody volunteer?
And yet there are a lot of excluded tests in smoke suite...

--
Alexey

> I don't say that we shouldn't have real application workloads. I just
> want to say that acceptance tests already usually reveal threading
> problems quite well if they are ran many times, and race conditions
> happen in some circumstances.
>
> However at the moment we already have failing tests, some of them like
> gc.LOS on WinXP don't need multiple times to make them fail. There's
> also java.lang.ThreadTest which fails for me on Windows 2003 server SP1
> and now started to fail on Linux as well.
>
> --
> Gregory
>
>

Mime
View raw message