Tests config for serialization of arrays

[Karm]

• Depends on [GR-52473] Serialization of arrays is not supported in Native Image oracle/graal#8509 being released via Backport: Allow custom constructors for arrays and enums graalvm/graalvm-community-jdk21u#10

• Depends on [GR-57707] native-image-agent omits String[] from "serialization" when using newConstructorForSerialization oracle/graal#9581 being fixed, backported and released.

Merging it now would trigger failures for CI.

[Karm]

 > but was: <Exception in thread "main" com.oracle.svm.core.jdk.UnsupportedFeatureError: SerializationConstructorAccessor class not found for declaringClass: [Z (targetConstructorClass: java.lang.Object). Usually adding [Z to serialization-config.json fixes the problem.
	at org.graalvm.nativeimage.builder/com.oracle.svm.core.util.VMError.unsupportedFeature(VMError.java:121)
	at org.graalvm.nativeimage.builder/com.oracle.svm.core.reflect.serialize.SerializationSupport.getSerializationConstructorAccessor(SerializationSupport.java:164)
	at [email protected]/jdk.internal.reflect.SerializationConstructorAccessorGenerator.generateSerializationConstructor(SerializationConstructorAccessorGenerator.java:51)
	at [email protected]/jdk.internal.reflect.ReflectionFactory.generateConstructor(ReflectionFactory.java:384)
	at [email protected]/jdk.internal.reflect.ReflectionFactory.newConstructorForSerialization(ReflectionFactory.java:288)
	at [email protected]/sun.reflect.ReflectionFactory.newConstructorForSerialization(ReflectionFactory.java:100)
	at for_serialization.Main.main(Main.java:147)
	at [email protected]/java.lang.invoke.LambdaForm$DMH/sa346b79c.invokeStaticInit(LambdaForm$DMH)
>
[INFO] 
Error:  Tests run: 9, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0

Expected. The fix is not in the released JDK 22 Mandrel

[zakkak]

Expected. The fix is not in the released JDK 22 Mandrel

And it's not going to get backported to it, so we probably need to disable it in that configuration.

[Karm]

Expected. The fix is not in the released JDK 22 Mandrel

And it's not going to get backported to it, so we probably need to disable it in that configuration.

I see, indeed. Lemme update it...

[Karm]

@zakkak How about this?
0732e2b

if it's not fixed by then, we can bump the versions so as not not fail CI unnecessarily...

[Karm]

Eh..

Failing now on this PR:

JDK 22.0.1+8, vendor version: Mandrel-24.0.1.0-Final

Exclusions in the test:

    @Test
    @Tag("builder-image")
    @IfMandrelVersion(min = "23.1.5", maxJDK = "21.999", inContainer = true)
    public void forSerializationContainer21Test(TestInfo testInfo) throws IOException, InterruptedException {
        forSerialization(testInfo, Apps.FOR_SERIALIZATION_BUILDER_IMAGE);
    }

    @Test
    @IfMandrelVersion(min = "23.1.5", maxJDK = "21.999")
    public void forSerialization21Test(TestInfo testInfo) throws IOException, InterruptedException {
        forSerialization(testInfo, Apps.FOR_SERIALIZATION);
    }

    @Test
    @Tag("builder-image")
    @IfMandrelVersion(min = "23.1.5", minJDK = "23", inContainer = true)
    public void forSerializationContainer23Test(TestInfo testInfo) throws IOException, InterruptedException {
        forSerialization(testInfo, Apps.FOR_SERIALIZATION_BUILDER_IMAGE);
    }

    @Test
    @IfMandrelVersion(min = "23.1.5", minJDK = "23")
    public void forSerialization23Test(TestInfo testInfo) throws IOException, InterruptedException {
        forSerialization(testInfo, Apps.FOR_SERIALIZATION);
    }

I am probably blind... or it's parsing Mandrel 24 as JDK 24?

[zakkak]

or it's parsing Mandrel 24 as JDK 24?

The logs say

The test suite runs with Mandrel version 24.0.2 in container, JDK 22.0.2.

so it doesn't look like a parsing issue.

I think the issue is that you are passing "21.999" as the maxJDK which doesn't match the pattern in

mandrel-integration-tests/testsuite/src/it/java/org/graalvm/tests/integration/utils/versions/MandrelVersionCondition.java

Line 46 in 9f6c895

private static final Pattern JDK_PATTERN = Pattern.compile("(?<jfeature>[0-9]+)(\\.(?<jinterim>[0-9]*)\\.(?<jupdate>[0-9]*))?");

[zakkak]

@Karm thanks for the fix. I opened #280 to keep track of the version parsing issue.