8334771: [TESTBUG] Run TestDockerMemoryMetrics.java with -Xcomp fails exitValue = 137

[sendaoYan]

Hi all,
After JDK-8294960, the footprint memory usage increased significantly when run the testcase with -Xcomp jvm options, then cause the testcase was killed by docker by OOM.
Maybe the footprint memory usage increased was inevitable, so I think we should increase the smallest memory limite for this testcase.
Only change the testcase, the change has been verified, no risk.

---

Progress

• Change must not contain extraneous whitespace
• Commit message must refer to an issue
• Change must be properly reviewed (2 reviews required, with at least 1 Reviewer, 1 Author)

Issue

• JDK-8334771: [TESTBUG] Run TestDockerMemoryMetrics.java with -Xcomp fails exitValue = 137 (Bug - P4)

Reviewers

• Leonid Mesnik (@lmesnik - Reviewer)
• Serguei Spitsyn (@sspitsyn - Reviewer)

Reviewing

Using git

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/19864/head:pull/19864
$ git checkout pull/19864

Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/19864
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/19864/head

Using Skara CLI tools

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 19864

View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 19864

Using diff file

Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19864.diff

Webrev

Link to Webrev Comment

[bridgekeeper]

👋 Welcome back syan! 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]

@sendaoYan 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:

8334771: [TESTBUG] Run TestDockerMemoryMetrics.java with -Xcomp fails exitValue = 137

Reviewed-by: lmesnik, sspitsyn

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 277 new commits pushed to the master branch:

• 21a6cf8: 8336587: failure_handler lldb command times out on macosx-aarch64 core file
• 78cc0f9: 8336091: Fix HTML warnings in the generated HTML files
• bcb5e69: 8335921: Fix HotSpot VM build without JVMTI
• 10186ff: 8336300: DateFormatSymbols#getInstanceRef returns non-cached instance
• 7ec55df: 8336638: Parallel: Remove redundant mangle in PSScavenge::invoke
• 6df7acb: 8299080: Wrong default value of snippet lang attribute
• 8713628: 8334217: [AIX] Misleading error messages after JDK-8320005
• 67979eb: 8334781: JFR crash: assert(((((JfrTraceIdBits::load(klass)) & ((JfrTraceIdEpoch::this_epoch_method_and_class_bits()))) != 0))) failed: invariant
• d41d2a7: 8334502: gtest/GTestWrapper.java fails on armhf due to LogDecorations.iso8601_utctime_test
• 59843f4: 8336040: Missing closing anchor element in Docs.gmk
• ... and 267 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/5ac2149b7bde947886533bf5996d977bb8ec66f1...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 (@lmesnik, @sspitsyn) 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).

[openjdk]

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

• core-libs
• serviceability

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 (a7c1d634)

[sendaoYan]

Thanks for the review and approved.
/integrate

[openjdk]

@sendaoYan
Your change (at version a7c1d63) is now ready to be sponsored by a Committer.

[jaikiran]

After JDK-8294960, the footprint memory usage increased significantly when run the testcase with -Xcomp jvm options, then cause the testcase was killed by docker by OOM.
Maybe the footprint memory usage increased was inevitable, so I think we should increase the smallest memory limite for this testcase.

Hello @sendaoYan, after changes in JDK-8294960, there were a couple of issues reported. From what I see in the linked issues, Adam reviewed those and integrated relevant fixes. In JDK-8334771 you note:

After JDK-8294960, the codecache usage increased significantly, non-profiled 3068Kb->3583Kb, profiled 6408Kb->7846Kb.

So I think we should have this increase in memory reviewed by @asotona or someone familiar in that area, before deciding whether these tests should be changed.

[jaikiran]

/reviewers 2

[openjdk]

@jaikiran
The total number of required reviews for this PR (including the jcheck configuration and the last /reviewers command) is now set to 2 (with at least 1 Reviewer, 1 Author).

[sendaoYan]

So I think we should have this increase in memory reviewed by @asotona or someone familiar in that area, before deciding whether these tests should be changed.

Okey.

[sspitsyn]

Looks okay. I agree this needs to be reviewed by @asotona .

[sendaoYan]

Looks okay. I agree this needs to be reviewed by @asotona .

Thanks for the review. I will wait reviewed by @asotona before integrate.

[asotona]

Unfortunately I'm not familiar with these tests.

[sendaoYan]

Unfortunately I'm not familiar with these tests.

After JDK-8294960, the codecache usage increased significantly, non-profiled 3068Kb->3583Kb, profiled 6408Kb->7846Kb.

Can you confirm that the codecache usage increased is expected or not after JDK-8294960 with -Xcomp jvm option.

[asotona]

I can confirm JDK-8294960 had effect on JDK bootstrap (benchmarked and discussed in #17108 ).
And there might be measurable differences in various benchmarks sensitive to JDK bootstrap.
However I cannot confirm the numbers above, simply because I do not know what they represent.

[jaikiran]

@sendaoYan, Given Adam's inputs and the reviews you have had for this change, I think you should be able to go ahead and integrate this.

[sendaoYan]

@sendaoYan, Given Adam's inputs and the reviews you have had for this change, I think you should be able to go ahead and integrate this.

Thanks all for the review. Can you sponsor this PR for me. @jaikiran
/integrate

[openjdk]

@sendaoYan
Your change (at version a7c1d63) is now ready to be sponsored by a Committer.

[sspitsyn]

/sponsor

[openjdk]

Going to push as commit fa5ad70.
Since your change was applied there have been 294 commits pushed to the master branch:

• 10fcad7: 8325945: Error reporting should limit the number of String characters printed
• f5871df: 8336675: Remove UnixFileSystemProvider.checkPath in favor of UnixPath.toUnixPath
• 902bada: 8234071: JTable.AUTO_RESIZE_LAST_COLUMN acts like AUTO_RESIZE_ALL_COLUMNS
• 1b9270a: 8328723: IP Address error when client enables HTTPS endpoint check on server socket
• 330e520: 8028127: Regtest java/security/Security/SynchronizedAccess.java is incorrect
• 39f4476: 8334772: Change Class::signers to an explicit field
• 902c2af: 8336585: BoundAttribute.readEntryList not type-safe
• b44632a: 8336588: Ensure Transform downstream receives upstream start items only after downstream started
• 02be7b8: 8334495: Use FFM instead of jdk.internal.misc.Unsafe in java.desktop font implementation
• bbc79a5: 8333768: Minor doc updates to java.lang.{Float, Double}
• ... and 284 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/5ac2149b7bde947886533bf5996d977bb8ec66f1...master

Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts.

[openjdk]

@sspitsyn @sendaoYan Pushed as commit fa5ad70.

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

[sendaoYan]

Thanks for the sponsor.