Skip to content

Fix internal-api-9 coverage verification - #13151

Draft
AlexeyKuznetsov-DD wants to merge 1 commit into
masterfrom
alexeyk/internal-api-9-coverage
Draft

AlexeyKuznetsov-DD wants to merge 1 commit into
masterfrom
alexeyk/internal-api-9-coverage

Conversation

@AlexeyKuznetsov-DD

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

What Does This Do

Makes :internal-api:internal-api-9:jacocoTestCoverageVerification pass. It adds tests for JDK9ModuleAccess, JDK9PidSupplier and JDK9ExecutableSupplier.

Motivation

The task fails on master: the module had a single test, and four classes were below the 0.8 coverage minimum.

Additional Notes

JDK9PidSupplier, JDK9ExecutableSupplier and JDK9StackWalker are excluded from coverage. What remains uncovered in them is JVM-specific fallback code (ProcessHandle failures, IBM J9 frame mapping) that can't run on our test JVMs without mocking static JDK APIs. Excluding them follows the existing pattern in internal-api (e.g. PidHelper), and keeps the module-wide minimum intact for new code.

JDK9ModuleAccessTest uses a real Instrumentation (ByteBuddyAgent.install()) and fresh class loaders, so module changes don't leak into other tests. Tested on Java 11 and 21.

Contributor Checklist

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

Add tests for JDK9ModuleAccess, JDK9PidSupplier and JDK9ExecutableSupplier,
and exclude classes whose remaining uncovered code is JVM-specific fallbacks.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
@AlexeyKuznetsov-DD AlexeyKuznetsov-DD added type: bug fix Bug fix comp: core Tracer core tag: no release notes Changes to exclude from release notes tag: ai generated Largely based on code generated by an AI or LLM labels Nov 1, 2026
@datadog-prod-us1-3

This comment has been minimized.

@dd-octo-sts

dd-octo-sts Bot commented Nov 1, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

🟢 Java Benchmark SLOs — All performance SLOs passed

Suite Status
Startup 🟢 pass

SLO thresholds are defined here based on automatically generated metrics. A warning is raised when results are within 5% of the threshold.

PR vs. master results
Scenario Candidate master Δ (95% CI of mean)
startup:insecure-bank:iast:Agent 14.03 s 13.92 s [-0.0%; +1.7%] (no difference)
startup:insecure-bank:tracing:Agent 12.85 s 12.99 s [-1.9%; -0.3%] (maybe better)
startup:petclinic:appsec:Agent 16.69 s 17.02 s [-6.3%; +2.4%] (no difference)
startup:petclinic:iast:Agent 16.97 s 16.59 s [-2.1%; +6.6%] (no difference)
startup:petclinic:profiling:Agent 16.85 s 16.96 s [-1.8%; +0.4%] (no difference)
startup:petclinic:sca:Agent 17.09 s 16.96 s [-0.3%; +1.8%] (no difference)
startup:petclinic:tracing:Agent 16.18 s 16.07 s [-0.3%; +1.6%] (no difference)

Commit: e872e3b6 · CI Pipeline · Benchmarking Platform UI


Load and DaCapo benchmarks can be triggered manually in the GitLab pipeline. Results will appear in the Benchmarking Platform UI after completion.

This branch has not been deployed

No deployments
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

comp: core Tracer core tag: ai generated Largely based on code generated by an AI or LLM tag: no release notes Changes to exclude from release notes type: bug fix Bug fix

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant