Review request for 7195249: Some jtreg tests use hard coded ports (original) (raw)
Jaroslav Bachorik jaroslav.bachorik at oracle.com
Wed Feb 5 05:20:23 PST 2014
- Previous message: Review request for 7195249: Some jtreg tests use hard coded ports
- Next message: Review request for 7195249: Some jtreg tests use hard coded ports
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Hi Taras,
thanks for taking care of this.
The changes look fine to me.
One minor nit is unused imports of the library classes in "test/sun/management/jmxremote/bootstrap/SSLConfigFilePermissionTest.java". It does not use any of those classes as its base class "AbstractFilePermissionTest" does all the heavy lifting.
Cheers,
-JB-
On 5.2.2014 13:42, taras ledkov wrote:
Hi,
So please take a look at the review against JDK9. The reviewed patch had not been integrated into JDK8. Port to JDK9 is identical. The difference: the ProcessTools.java has been already patched by Jaroslav. Webrev for jdk part: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~anazarov/7195249/jdk/webrev.03/ Webrev for hs part: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~anazarov/7195249/hs/webrev.03/
On 21.01.2014 13:45, Jaroslav Bachorik wrote: Hi Taras,
On 21.1.2014 10:30, taras ledkov wrote: Hi Jaroslav,
Could you please review the last changes? Are you OK? Yes, the change looks ok. But I think we will need to get back to this problem eventually and implement a central port dispatcher if we want to be 100% sure the port conflicts wouldn't occur. But your changes reduce the chance significantly. Thanks for taking care of this. -JB-
On 20.01.2014 19:21, Staffan Larsen wrote: Sorry for not replying earlier. Yes, I’m ok with these changes. Thanks, /Staffan On 20 jan 2014, at 16:07, taras ledkov <taras.ledkov at oracle.com> wrote:
Hi Staffan,
I fixed the tests according with your comments. Are you OK? On 15.01.2014 19:15, taras ledkov wrote: Hi,
Please take a look at the new review. Webrev for jdk part: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~anazarov/7195249/jdk/webrev.02/ Webrev for hs part: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~anazarov/7195249/hs/webrev.02/ My answers are inline: On 08.01.2014 17:46, Staffan Larsen wrote: Hi Taras,
Thanks for doing this clean up and conversion of tests into Java. Here’s a couple of comments: test/runtime/6294277/SourceDebugExtension.java: This test could be simplified by not specifying an address at all. Since the test never connects to the JVM started with -Xrunjdwp, there is no reason to specify an address. If address is unspecified (and server=y), the connector will pick an address and print it to the command line. Thus the only change that needs to be done is to remove ",address=8888” from the @run command. fixed test/sun/management/jmxremote/bootstrap/RmiBootstrapTest.sh: test/sun/management/jmxremote/bootstrap/RmiSslBootstrapTest.sh: These tests do not compile cleanly with an empty JTwork directory. It seems that having one @build for each class does not work well - when compiling RmiBootstrapTest.java it cannot find TestLogger. Moving all classes to one @build statement solved this problem for me. fixed test/lib/testlibrary/jdk/testlibrary/ProcessTools.java: 187 Future stdoutTask = stdout.process(); 188 Future stderrTask = stderr.process(); The stdoutTask and stderrTask variables are unused. fixed test/sun/management/jmxremote/bootstrap/RmiRegistrySslTest.java: At first I thought something was wrong with this file - the diff is very weird. Then I realized you renamed an old file and created a new file using the old name. You are right. I did it to keep the test name. test/sun/management/jmxremote/bootstrap/AbstractFilePermissionTest.java:
- Is resetPasswordFilePermission() really necessary? It looks like you delete the files at the beginning of the test in any case. I think yes. n the first place, this functionality was at the old code. In the second place, a file without write permission may be a problem for a further cleanup (not by the test, for example for the tests launcher scripts etc.) - I find the names and usage of “mgmt” and “file2PermissionTest” confusing. They are both Paths. One is used directly by the sub-classes, the other has a getter method. fixed - Lines 57-58: Don’t swallow exceptions, add an ex.printStackTrace(). (Same thing for all other places where you call Integer.parseInt()) fixed test/sun/management/jmxremote/bootstrap/Dummy.java: This file is never used as far as I can see. It is used by PasswordFilePermissionTest & SSLConfigFilePermissionTest via the AbstractFilePermissionTest (see the doTest method, AbstractFilePermissionTest : 162). Thanks, /Staffan
On 26 dec 2013, at 14:09, taras ledkov <taras.ledkov at oracle.com> wrote: Hi, Please take a look at the review with fixed issues about trying to launch test that needs free port several times. Webrev for jdk part: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~anazarov/7195249/jdk/webrev.01/ Webrev for hs part: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~anazarov/7195249/hs/webrev.01/ Pay your attention to new method ProcessTools.startProcess(String, ProcessBuilder, Consumer) that is used to analyze all output of a sub-process. It has common part with ProcessTools.startProcess(String, ProcessBuilder, Predicate, long, TumeUnit) that is used to determine the warm-up moment. I think the ProcessTools.startProcess(String, ProcessBuilder, Predicate, long, TumeUnit) may be changed by adding LinePump to stderr if there is not serious reason for restricting the warm-up analysis to stdout stream. On 10.12.2013 16:16, Yekaterina Kantserova wrote: Hi, I've consulted with Serviceability engineers (add them to CC list) and they would like to see tests to solve these problem so far: 2. Implement loops in every test. Thanks, Katja On 12/09/2013 11:02 AM, Alexandre (Shura) Iline wrote: Guys. Let me try to sum up what was said before and may be suggest a compromise. 1. There is a desire to have a support port allocation on the level of a JTReg suite execution. Taras created a bug for that (https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-7195249). Whether it is a test harness API or a library API does not really matter from usage point of view. 2. There is no way to make the tests absolutely stable, whatever port allocation logic is used. The best we could do is to try to perform the test logic with different ports until the test succeeds. Both arguments make sense. #2 is the ultimate answer, of course, but better be used in conjunction with a meaningful port selection algorithm. At the same time, copying a loop-until-success login from one test to another may be not the best solution. Library could help with that I believe. There only need to be an API method which takes behavior as a parameter and run it until it succeeds. Something like: public runOnAFreePort(Function<T, Integer>) or similar. There could be arguments of how/whether to implement it, the solution would not work for shell tests, etc, but still ... With the tests in question though, we have a few options. 1. Integrate tests as is. Get to it later after reaching agreement in the library, etc. 2. Implement loops in every test. 3. Wait for the library to be ready and only then integrate the changes. Please let us know which one is closer to your heart. I personally prefer #1 for the reason that the changes already supposed to make the tests more stable and also there are many more tests tests which use ports, so the scope of the problem is bigger than these. Shura Taras, I agree with the previous comments, that Utils.getFreePort() does not guarantee the port will be still free when you start your process. Unfortunately I don't think the library can do more. However, there is a solution. Please, look at the *jdk/test/sun/tools/jstatd/JstatdTest.java tryToSetupJstatdProcess()*. In brief, the test will try to start a process with a free port and then check if /java.rmi.server.ExportException: Port already in use/ has been thrown. If yes, you have to retry. Thanks, Katja
On 12/02/2013 01:39 PM, taras ledkov wrote: Hi Everyone, Whatever logic is to be chosen to select a free port, it is the library responsibility to implements it, would not you agree? Hence what I am suggesting is to integrate the tests as is. Should we decide to replace logic of the port selection, we could do it later in the library. On 21.11.2013 15:00, Jaroslav Bachorik wrote: On 20.11.2013 18:38, Dmitry Samersoff wrote: Roger, As soon as we close a socket nobody can guarantee that the port is free. Moreover, port returned by getFreePort()[1] remains not accessible for some time - it depends to system setup, take a look to discussions around SOREUSEPORT for Linux or SOREUSEADDR and SOLINGER for BSD. So from stability point of view it's better to just return random number between 49152 and 65535. Well, this doesn't seem to improve the odds by much. When there are more tests run in parallel, all of them requiring a free port, nothing prevents the random function to return the same port to all of them. Also, two subsequent requests can return the same port and cause problems with timing when a port used by a previous test is not fully ready to be assigned to a different socket. And as Dmitry pointed out unless one can keep hold of the allocated socket and use it later there is no guarantee that a port which was tested unallocated will remain unallocated also for the next few milliseconds. The only fail proof solution would be a port allocating service provided by the harness. Until then we can only (hopefully) decrease the chance of intermittent failures due to a port being in use. -JB- -Dmitry [1] 141 public static int getFreePort() throws InterruptedException, IOException { 142 int port = -1; 143 144 while (port <= 0) { 145 Thread.sleep(100); 146 147 ServerSocket serverSocket = null; 148 try { 149 serverSocket = new ServerSocket(0); 150 port = serverSocket.getLocalPort(); 151 } finally { 152 serverSocket.close(); 153 } 154 } 155 156 return port; 157 } 158 On 2013-11-20 19:40, roger riggs wrote: Hi, fyi, The jdk.testlibrary.Utils.getFreePort() method will Open an free Socket, close it and return the port number. And as Alan recommended, use (0) when possible to have the system assign the port #. Roger On 11/20/2013 8:04 AM, Dmitry Samersoff wrote: Taras, The only correct way to take really free port is: 1. Chose random number between 49152 and 65535 2. Open socket if socket fails - repeat step 1 if socket OK - return socket
If you can't keep the socket open (e.g. you have to pass port number as property value) you shouldn't do any pre-check as it has no value - as as soon as you close socket someone can take the port. So just choose a random number within the range above and let networking code opening socket to handle port conflict. -Dmitry
On 2013-11-20 15:54, taras ledkov wrote: Hi Everyone, I am working on bug https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-7195249. There are two webrevs: Webrev for jdk part: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~anazarov/7195249/jdk/webrev.00/ Webrev for hs part: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~anazarov/7195249/hs/webrev.00/ Please take a look at some notes: - After discussing with Yekaterina Kantserova & Jaroslav Bachorik some shell tests have been converted to java based tests - PasswordFilePermissionTest & SSLConfigFilePermissionTest tests looked very similar, so a common parent class was created for them: AbstractFilePermissionTest - What was called RmiRegistrySslTest.java I've renamed to RmiRegistrySslTestApp.java. The java code to replace old shell script RmiRegistrySslTest.sh is called RmiRegistrySslTest.java, hence the huge diff. - The new RmiRegistrySslTest.java has some lines similar to the AbstractFilePermissionTest.java, I nevertheless decided to not complicate the code further and leave it as is. Please let me know if this is somehow not acceptable - com/oracle/java/testlibrary/Utils.java that is added to hotspot repository is taken from this patch: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ykantser/8023138/webrev.00/test/lib/testlibrary/jdk/testlibrary/Utils.java.sdiff.html
- These tests will need additional changes when test library process tools will support command line options inheritance (http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/serviceability-dev/2013-November/013235.html)