harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Sian January" <sianjanu...@googlemail.com>
Subject Re: [testing] first M7 candidate (r681495) testing status
Date Mon, 08 Sep 2008 09:04:54 GMT
Thanks Ligang - I meant to get to this at some point before M8 but
you've saved me a job now :-)



On 08/09/2008, Ligang Wang <wanglg9711@gmail.com> wrote:
> Sian, I looked at the Throwable.initCause() problem and agree with you.
>
> My observation on this issue is as follows.
>
> DRLVM implementation of Throwable.initCause():
>       public Throwable initCause(Throwable initialCause) {
>              if (initialCause == this) {
>                     throw new IllegalArgumentException("A throwable cannot
> be its own cause.");
>              }
>              // second call of initCause(Throwable)
>              if (cause != this) {
>                     throw new IllegalStateException("A cause can be set at
> most once." +
>                    " Illegal attempt to re-set the cause of " + this);
>              }
>              cause = initialCause;
>              return this;
>       }
> Firstly "this" is assigned to the private member "cause".
>
> CLASSLIB implementation of Throwable.initCause():
> public synchronized Throwable initCause(Throwable throwable) {
>        if (cause == this) {
>            if (throwable != this) {
>                cause = throwable;
>                return this;
>            }
>            throw new IllegalArgumentException("Cause cannot be the
> receiver");
>        }
>        throw new IllegalStateException("Cause already initialized");
> }
> Firstly "this" is assigned to the private member "cause".
>
> The description of of JavaDoc of Throwable.initCause():
> public Throwable<file:///C:/Program%20Files/Java/jdk-1.5.0-docs/api/java/lang/Throwable.html>
> *initCause*(Throwable<file:///C:/Program%20Files/Java/jdk-1.5.0-docs/api/java/lang/Throwable.html>
>  cause)
> Initializes the *cause* of this throwable to the specified value. This
> method can be called at most once.
> *Throws:*
> IllegalArgumentException<file:///C:/Program%20Files/Java/jdk-1.5.0-docs/api/java/lang/IllegalArgumentException.html>-
> if
> cause is this throwable. (A throwable cannot be its own cause.)
> IllegalStateException<file:///C:/Program%20Files/Java/jdk-1.5.0-docs/api/java/lang/IllegalStateException.html>-
> if this throwable was created with
> Throwable(Throwable)<file:///C:/Program%20Files/Java/jdk-1.5.0-docs/api/java/lang/Throwable.html#Throwable(java.lang.Throwable)>or
> Throwable(String,Throwable)<file:///C:/Program%20Files/Java/jdk-1.5.0-docs/api/java/lang/Throwable.html#Throwable(java.lang.String,
> java.lang.Throwable)>, or this method has already been called on this
> throwable.
>
> The first exception is thrown when "cause" parameter is "this", and the
> second exception is thrown when "causce", the instance member, is set for
> the second time. From the description of JavaDoc, we can see there is an
> overlap between the two exceptions. If initCause is called for the second
> time and "cause" parameter is "this", which exception will be thrown?
> JavaDoc doesn't have clear description on this. The DRLVM implementation
> throws the first exception, while the CLASSLIB implementation throws the
> second. We can not tell which is better.
>
> But as Sian said, JavaDoc for ServerCloneException says that "Invoking the
> method Throwable.initCause(Throwable)<file:///C:/Program%20Files/Java/jdk-1.5.0-docs/api/java/lang/Throwable.html#initCause(java.lang.Throwable)>on
> an instance of
> ServerCloneException always throws
> IllegalStateException<file:///C:/Program%20Files/Java/jdk-1.5.0-docs/api/java/lang/IllegalStateException.html>".
> With this statement, we may see the CLASSLIB implementation is better. I
> have modified ServerCloneExceptionTest.test_Constructor_String() and
> Throwable.initCause() accordingly. The related JIRA issue is
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-5971.
>
> Thanks,
> Ligang
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 6:50 PM, Sian January <sianjanuary@googlemail.com>wrote:
>
> > Oliver has helped me track this down this morning, and it's occuring
> > because there are differences between the versions of
> > Throwable.initCause(..) in luni and in DRLVM.  According to the spec,
> > I think the test should be changed to check for IllegalStateException
> > instead of IllegalArgumentException and then I think the version of
> > Throwable in DRLVM should be changed to behave the same as the one in
> > luni.  However I don't think this is a big deal for M7 because I don't
> > think it's very serious and it's not a regression since M6.  What does
> > anyone else think?
> >
> > Sian
> >
> > On 13/08/2008, Sian January <sianjanuary@googlemail.com> wrote:
> > > I think the code is right and the test is wrong here, because the
> > > Javadoc for ServerCloneException says that "Invoking the method
> > > Throwable.initCause(Throwable) on an instance of ServerCloneException
> > > always throws IllegalStateException."
> > >
> > > What is really confusing me is how this can be passing for anyone
> > > else... The exclude list hasn't changed recently and I don't see how
> > > it could be VM dependent either.
> > >
> > >
> > > On 13/08/2008, Nathan Beyer <ndbeyer@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 10:18 AM, Sian January
> > > > <sianjanuary@googlemail.com>wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I am not seeing the management failures on my local (Windows)
> > machine,
> > > > > but I'm seeing an rmi failure:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > org.apache.harmony.rmi.server.ServerCloneExceptionTest.test_Constructor_String
> > > > > Cause already initialized
> > > > > java.lang.IllegalStateException: Cause already initialized
> > > > > at java.lang.Throwable.initCause(Throwable.java:293)
> > > > > at
> > > > >
> > org.apache.harmony.rmi.server.ServerCloneExceptionTest.test_Constructor_String(ServerCloneExceptionTest.java:70)
> > > > > at
> > java.lang.reflect.AccessibleObject.invokeV(AccessibleObject.java:25)
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > This test [1] is creating an exception and then passing itself into
> > > > 'initCause', which should throw IllegalArgumentException. Looking at
> > the
> > > > code though, it does look like there's a bug, as 'null' is being passed
> > to
> > > > the super() constructor, which will mess up Throwable, since it
> > initializes
> > > > 'cause' to 'this', so Throwable will think the cause is already set.
> > > >
> > > > Did this test recently get removed from an exclusion list?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > [1]
> > > >
> > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/harmony/enhanced/classlib/trunk/modules/rmi/src/test/api/java/org/apache/harmony/rmi/server/ServerCloneExceptionTest.java?view=annotate
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > and an intermittent failure in java.net:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > org.apache.harmony.luni.tests.java.net.URLConnectionTest.test_getInputStream
> > > > >
> > > > > Error receiving content coded data:
> > > > > junit.framework.AssertionFailedError: Error receiving content coded
> > data:
> > > > > at
> > tests.support.Support_HttpTests.runTests(Support_HttpTests.java:15)
> > > > > at
> > > > >
> > org.apache.harmony.luni.tests.java.net.URLConnectionTest.test_getInputStream(URLConnectionTest.java:632)
> > > > > at
> > java.lang.reflect.AccessibleObject.invokeV(AccessibleObject.java:25)
> > > > >
> > > > > Is anyone else seeing these?
> > > > >
> > > > > Sian
> > > > >
> > > > > On 12/08/2008, chunrong lai <chunronglai@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > >   Thanks.
> > > > > >   I think the standard scripts produce that site although I
always
> > added
> > > > > > publish/e-mail notification setup before install/run the test
> > suites.
> > > > > >   It is understandable that some tests in classlib-test and
> > drlvm-test
> > > > > get
> > > > > > failing report. We just need to understand the failures.
> > > > > >   As reported in M6,
> > > > > > org.apache.harmony.lang.management.MemoryPoolMXBeanImplTest,
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > org.apache.harmony.lang.management.tests.java.lang.management.MemoryPoolMXBeanTest
> > > > > > etc fail classlib-test.
> > > > > >   Also we observed that java.lang.ClassGenericsTest.test_2
> > sometimes fail
> > > > > > drlvm-test.
> > > > > >   Another timeout issue of drlvm-test comes from
> > > > > > thread.SmallStackThreadTest_jit, as discussed in HARMONY-4601,
the
> > test
> > > > > case
> > > > > > may run very slow when system resource is tight and finally
> > introduce a
> > > > > > timeout. Re-running the suite generally fixes the timeout.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 8/12/08, Nathan Beyer <ndbeyer@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > It's the tests that are failing - both classlib-test and
> > drlvm-test.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > What's the specific integrity setup that's being used for
that
> > site?
> > > > > Does
> > > > > > > the standard out-of-the-box buildtest scripts produce that
site?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > -Nathan
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Mon, Aug 11, 2008 at 9:05 PM, chunrong lai <
> > chunronglai@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > hi, Nathan:
> > > > > > > >     Steps to run testing cycle are listed in
> > > > > > > > http://harmony.apache.org/subcomponents/buildtest/index.html.
> > One
> > > > > > > > integrity
> > > > > > > > testing example is
> > > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > http://harmony.apache.org/subcomponents/buildtest/howto.html#Extended.
> > > > > > > >      What is the error message you met (in what step)?
What is
> > the
> > > > > > > content
> > > > > > > > of the framework.local.properties file? I think that
will help
> > to
> > > > > figure
> > > > > > > > out
> > > > > > > > the problem.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On 8/12/08, Nathan Beyer <ndbeyer@apache.org>
wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > What's being used to produce the integrity tests?
I have an
> > x86_64
> > > > > > > Linux
> > > > > > > > > box
> > > > > > > > > that I can dedicate to testing. I've tried just
using
> > buildtest
> > > > > with
> > > > > > > > > 'classlib,drlvm,classib-test,drlvm-test', but
I haven't
> > gotten a
> > > > > clean
> > > > > > > > pass
> > > > > > > > > yet.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > -Nathan
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Mon, Aug 11, 2008 at 12:26 PM, chunrong lai
<
> > > > > chunronglai@gmail.com
> > > > > > > > > >wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Hi, all:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >  Here is r681495 snapshot testing status:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > http://people.apache.org/~chunrong/snapshots/r681495/index.html<
> > http://people.apache.org/%7Echunrong/snapshots/r681495/index.html>
> > > > > <
> > > > > > >
> > http://people.apache.org/%7Echunrong/snapshots/r681495/index.html>
> > > > > > > > <
> > > > > > > > >
> > http://people.apache.org/%7Echunrong/snapshots/r681495/index.html
> > > > > >.
> > > > > > > > > > I am using
> > > > > > > > > > two platforms (Linux x86, windows x86_64)
at the moment.
> > > > > Hopefully we
> > > > > > > > > will
> > > > > > > > > > have other two platforms in future for M8.
Well, although
> > we are
> > > > > > > > testing
> > > > > > > > > > only two platforms for M7, my experience
is that the status
> > for
> > > > > > > another
> > > > > > > > > two
> > > > > > > > > > platforms should be not worse or just include
some extra
> > > > > intermittent
> > > > > > > > > > errors
> > > > > > > > > > which can be investigated in some later
stages.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >  The following suites passed on Linux x86/Windows
x86_64
> > > > > platforms:
> > > > > > > Ant
> > > > > > > > > > Scenario (or self-hosting), Axis application,
Dacapo, DRLVM
> > > > > > > regression
> > > > > > > > > > tests, Geronimo Unit Tests, Scimark, Tomcat
scenario, VTS
> > VM Test
> > > > > > > > Suite.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >  Most of the failures are known issues (for
M6). Although
> > we can
> > > > > > > > observe
> > > > > > > > > > 15~20 new issues, those issues happen only
in 1 platform
> > and they
> > > > > > > look
> > > > > > > > > more
> > > > > > > > > > like the intermittent/timeout issues (less
reproducible) to
> > me.
> > > > > > > Overall
> > > > > > > > I
> > > > > > > > > > myself would like to think r681495 is more
stable than M6.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >  Please add your comments and clarifications
(please also
> > see M6
> > > > > > > > testing
> > > > > > > > > > results http://people.apache.org/~smishura/r653525/<
> > http://people.apache.org/%7Esmishura/r653525/>
> > > > > <
> > > > > > > http://people.apache.org/%7Esmishura/r653525/>
> > > > > > > > <
> > > > > > > > > http://people.apache.org/%7Esmishura/r653525/>
> > > > > > > > > > ,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/harmony-dev/200805.mbox/%3c6e47b64f0805070304l38845ee0se01fb93fbfc05586@mail.gmail.com%3eand
> > > > > > > > > > integrity testing results
> > > > > > > > > > http://people.apache.org/~chunrong/harmony-integrity/<
> > http://people.apache.org/%7Echunrong/harmony-integrity/>
> > > > > <
> > > > > > > http://people.apache.org/%7Echunrong/harmony-integrity/>
> > > > > > > > <
> > > > > > > > > http://people.apache.org/%7Echunrong/harmony-integrity/>as
a
> > > > > > > > comparison).
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >  1) Classlib:
> > > > > > > > > >    1.1) Since r644719 (which committed patch
for
> > HARMONY-5684)
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > >  org.apache.harmony.lang.management.MemoryPoolMXBeanImplTest
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > org.apache.harmony.lang.management.tests.java.lang.management.MemoryPoolMXBeanTest
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >         failed in both platforms
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >    1.2) Two failures
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> >  org.apache.harmony.luni.tests.java.net.MulticastSocketTest
> > > > > > > > (Failed
> > > > > > > > > > in windows_x86 running of M6)
> > > > > > > > > >        tests.api.java.security.PermissionCollectionTest
> > > > > > > > (Failed
> > > > > > > > > > in M6)
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >         are observed in Linux x86.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >  2) DRLVM tests:
> > > > > > > > > >    2.1) One failure
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >         java.lang.ClassGenericsTest.test_2
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >         is observed in Linux x86 snapshot
testing.
> > > > > > > > > >         I can see some old discussion in
the mailing list
> > about
> > > > > that
> > > > > > > > but
> > > > > > > > > I
> > > > > > > > > > am not sure the expected status here.
> > > > > > > > > >         They should be intemittent errors
since the
> > integrity
> > > > > testing
> > > > > > > > > just
> > > > > > > > > > run well mostly.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >  3) EUTs:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >    3.1) Linux x86: 99.36%
> > > > > > > > > >         A recorded JIRA for this suite is
HARMONY-2914
> > which
> > > > > wastes
> > > > > > > > file
> > > > > > > > > > handlers and makes system unstable.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >  4) Functional:
> > > > > > > > > >    4.1) Old regressions on both platforms:
> > > > > > > > > >         api.java.text.MessageFormat (HARMONY-5430)
> > > > > > > > > >         api.java.util.jar.Manifest  (HARMONY-5473)
> > > > > > > > > >         api.java.beans.beancontext.BeanContextTest
(also in
> > M6,
> > > > > > > > recorded
> > > > > > > > > > as  regression caused by changes in locale
data)
> > > > > > > > > >         api.java.beans.persistence.EncoderTest
 (also in
> > M6,
> > > > > recorded
> > > > > > > > as
> > > > > > > > > > regression in the beans module)
> > > > > > > > > >         api.java.beans.persistence.EncoderDecoderTest
(also
> > in
> > > > > M6,
> > > > > > > > > > regression in the beans module)
> > > > > > > > > >         reg.vm.btest5625 (also in M6, recorded
as
> > intermittent
> > > > > and
> > > > > > > not
> > > > > > > > > > reproducible manually)
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >    4.2) Old regressions on 1 platform
> > > > > > > > > >         api.java.rmi.basicexception (ERROR
in Linux x86,
> > > > > > > HARMONY-5823)
> > > > > > > > > >         api.java.rmi.basicregistry.RemoteServerTest
(ERROR
> > in
> > > > > Linux
> > > > > > > > x86,
> > > > > > > > > > HARMONY-5823)
> > > > > > > > > >         jpda.jdwp.scenario.ST07.ST07Test
(ERROR in windows
> > > > > x86_64, in
> > > > > > > > M6
> > > > > > > > > it
> > > > > > > > > > is recorded as regression since M4)
> > > > > > > > > >         java.math.F_BigIntegerMatrixMultiplyTest_01
(ERROR
> > on
> > > > > Linux
> > > > > > > > x86,
> > > > > > > > > > recorded as Timeout, not reproducible
> > > > > > > > > >  in M6)
> > > > > > > > > >         reg.vm.btest5717 (ERROR on Windows
X86_64, recorded
> > as
> > > > > > > > "timeout,
> > > > > > > > > > the test is too heavy" in M6)
> > > > > > > > > >
> > jit.HLO.inline.ControlFlow.IfElse.IfElse1.IfElseTest1
> > > > > (FAILED
> > > > > > > > in
> > > > > > > > > > windows x86_64, recorded as "looks like
> > > > > > > > > > issue in test" in M6)
> > > > > > > > > >         jit.HLO.devirt.Runtime.RuntimeExtend1
(FAILED on
> > windows
> > > > > > > > x86_64,
> > > > > > > > > in
> > > > > > > > > > M6 it is recorded as not regression and
started to fail on
> > M5)
> > > > > > > > > >         reg.vm.btest6353.Btest6353 (ERROR
on Windows
> > x86_64,
> > > > > recorded
> > > > > > > > > also
> > > > > > > > > > failed on M3 and might be issue with the
test)
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >    4.3) New regressions on 1 platform (looks
intermittent)
> > > > > > > > > >         reg.jit.btest8029.Btest8029 (FAILED
in Linux x86)
> > > > > > > > > >         func.reg.jit.btest5710.Btest5710
(FAILED in Linux
> > x86)
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > api.java.security.cert.F_CertPathTest_06.F_CertPathTest_06
> > > > > > > > (ERROR
> > > > > > > > > > in Linux x86)
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > api.java.security.cert.F_CertPathTest_05.F_CertPathTest_05
> > > > > > > > (ERROR
> > > > > > > > > > in Linux x86)
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >  5) JDKTools Tests:
> > > > > > > > > >    Several timeouts are observed in Linux
x86 snapshot
> > running.
> > > > > They
> > > > > > > > are:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > org.apache.harmony.jpda.tests.jdwp.DebuggerOnDemand.OnthrowDebuggerLaunchTest.testDebuggerLaunch001
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > org.apache.harmony.jpda.tests.jdwp.DebuggerOnDemand.OnthrowDebuggerLaunchTest.testDebuggerLaunch002
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > org.apache.harmony.jpda.tests.jdwp.DebuggerOnDemand.OnthrowDebuggerLaunchTest.testDebuggerLaunch003
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > org.apache.harmony.jpda.tests.jdwp.DebuggerOnDemand.OnthrowDebuggerLaunchTest.testDebuggerLaunch004
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > org.apache.harmony.jpda.tests.jdwp.Events.CombinedEventsTest.testCombinedEvents_04
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > org.apache.harmony.jpda.tests.jdwp.MultiSession.AttachConnectorTest.testAttachConnector001
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > org.apache.harmony.jpda.tests.jdwp.MultiSession.MethodEntryExitTest.testMethodEvent001
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > org.apache.harmony.jpda.tests.jdwp.MultiSession.ResumeTest.testResume
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > org.apache.harmony.jpda.tests.jdwp.MultiSession.ThreadEndTest.testThreadEnd001
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > org.apache.harmony.jpda.tests.jdwp.MultiSession.ThreadStartTest.testThreadStart001
> > > > > > > > > >    The Linux-only timeouts are also observed
in the
> > integrity
> > > > > testing
> > > > > > > > > > results.
> > > > > > > > > >    JIRA HARMONY-5833 has been filed for
one of them.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >  6) JettyScenario:
> > > > > > > > > >    The Linux x86 running failed because
of the unresolved
> > > > > > > HARMONY-5219.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >  7) Reliability:
> > > > > > > > > >    Several failures are observed in windows
x86_64 running.
> > > > > > > > > >    7.1) Old regressions
> > > > > > > > > >         api.net.DatagramTest (HARMONY-5531)
> > > > > > > > > >         api.text.DecimalFormat_Locales -
(in M6 it is
> > recorded as
> > > > > > > also
> > > > > > > > > > intermittent in M5)
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >    7.2) New/intemittent regressions
> > > > > > > > > >         api.kernel.thread.ThreadLocalTest.ThreadLocalTest
> > > > > > > > > >         api.kernel.exec.RunExec
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >  8) Stress
> > > > > > > > > >    Different test cases failed on different
platforms.
> > > > > > > > > >    8.1) Timeouts on Linux x86.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > stress.org.apache.harmony.test.stress.jpda.jdwp.scenario.THREAD003.ThreadTest003
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > stress.org.apache.harmony.test.stress.jpda.jdwp.scenario.THREAD007.ThreadTest007
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > stress.org.apache.harmony.test.stress.jpda.jdwp.scenario.THREAD009.ThreadTest009
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > stress.org.apache.harmony.test.stress.jpda.jdwp.scenario.THREAD011.ThreadTest011
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >    8.2) Failed cases on Windows x86_64 with
unknown
> > reasons.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > stress.org.apache.harmony.test.stress.classloader.MixThreads.TreeClasses.testTreeClasses2
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > stress.org.apache.harmony.test.stress.classloader.NotSynchThreads.TreeClasses.testTreeClasses
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >    I have not found records for them.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >  9) Strut_test
> > > > > > > > > >    Broken with same error report as M6.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >  10) Eclipse Hello World Application.
> > > > > > > > > >    Although the testing framework just reports
EUT-API
> > status as
> > > > > > > > > "PASSED".
> > > > > > > > > > A fresh workspace running just failed in
configuration
> > stage (
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/harmony-dev/200805.mbox/%3c6e47b64f0805120106o387a49f1rfb2c33d1042d2f41@mail.gmail.com%3e
> > > > > > > > > > )
> > > > > > > > > > since SVN commit 641928 (which committed
patch for
> > HARMONY-4569).
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > thanks,
> > > > > > > > > > chunrong
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Unless stated otherwise above:
> > > > > IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with
> > number
> > > > > 741598.
> > > > > Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire
> > PO6 3AU
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Unless stated otherwise above:
> > > IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number
> > 741598.
> > > Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6
> > 3AU
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> >  Unless stated otherwise above:
> > IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number
> > 741598.
> > Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU
> >
>


-- 
Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598.
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU

Mime
View raw message