harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Regis <xu.re...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [classlib][luni] ServerSocketTest.test_setReuseAddressZ() faild on Linux
Date Thu, 12 Feb 2009 09:19:24 GMT
Jim Yu wrote:
> 2009/2/12 Regis <xu.regis@gmail.com>
> 
>> Jim Yu wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Regis,
>>> I reproduced this failure on my Linux platform. Since the specs
>>> says SO_REUSEADDR  "is used only
>>> for MulticastSockets in java, and it is set by default for
>>> MulticastSockets." So as you said, the default value
>>>
>> I can't find this statement in specs. And at:
> 
> 
> You can find the statement in the spec from the description for SO_REUSEADDR
> field of SocketOptions. .
Thanks. That really confuse me :( Maybe spec's bug?
> 
>>
>> http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.5.0/docs/api/java/net/ServerSocket.html#setReuseAddress(boolean)
>>
>> it says "Enabling SO_REUSEADDR prior to binding the socket using
>> bind(SocketAddress) allows the socket to be bound even though a previous
>> connection is in a timeout state. " and it really affect behaviors of bind.
> 
> 
>>  for SO_REUSEADDR in ServerSocket which is not defined is reasonable. IMO,
>>> it
>>> is a non-bug difference between
>>> Harmony and RI.
>>>
>> I incline to follow RI. Because there are already lots of code depends on
>> RI's behaviors: create a new ServerSocket which reuse address default, no
>> need to set it explicit.
>>
>> If Harmony set the default value to false, many applications may not be
>> able to bind address correctly.
> 
> 
> The spec says "the initial setting of SO_REUSEADDR is not defined."
> However, it sounds reasonable to follow RI.
> 
I will raise JIRA to trace this.
>>
>>> 2009/1/23 Regis <xu.regis@gmail.com>
>>>
>>>  did anyone notice the failures on linux? or it just happen on my local
>>>> env?
>>>> junit.framework.AssertionFailedError: Unexpected exception when
>>>> setReuseAddress is the default case and we
>>>> bind:Harmony-L3NEK37/127.0.0.1:55891:java.net.BindException: The address
>>>> is not available
>>>> at junit.framework.Assert.fail(Assert.java:47)
>>>> at
>>>>
>>>> org.apache.harmony.luni.tests.java.net.ServerSocketTest.test_setReuseAddressZ(ServerSocketTest.java:760)
>>>> at java.lang.reflect.VMReflection.invokeMethod(VMReflection.java)
>>>> at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:317)
>>>> at junit.framework.TestCase.runTest(TestCase.java:154)
>>>> at junit.framework.TestCase.runBare(TestCase.java:127)
>>>> at junit.framework.TestResult$1.protect(TestResult.java:106)
>>>> at junit.framework.TestResult.runProtected(TestResult.java:124)
>>>> at junit.framework.TestResult.run(TestResult.java:109)
>>>> at junit.framework.TestCase.run(TestCase.java:118)
>>>> at junit.framework.TestSuite.runTest(TestSuite.java:208)
>>>> at junit.framework.TestSuite.run(TestSuite.java:203)
>>>> at
>>>>
>>>> org.eclipse.jdt.internal.junit.runner.junit3.JUnit3TestReference.run(JUnit3TestReference.java:128)
>>>> at
>>>>
>>>> org.eclipse.jdt.internal.junit.runner.TestExecution.run(TestExecution.java:38)
>>>> at
>>>>
>>>> org.eclipse.jdt.internal.junit.runner.RemoteTestRunner.runTests(RemoteTestRunner.java:459)
>>>> at
>>>>
>>>> org.eclipse.jdt.internal.junit.runner.RemoteTestRunner.runTests(RemoteTestRunner.java:673)
>>>> at
>>>>
>>>> org.eclipse.jdt.internal.junit.runner.RemoteTestRunner.run(RemoteTestRunner.java:386)
>>>> at
>>>>
>>>> org.eclipse.jdt.internal.junit.runner.RemoteTestRunner.main(RemoteTestRunner.java:196)
>>>>
>>>> I found the default value of ServerSocket.getReuseAddress() on Linux
>>>> should
>>>> be true, but on Harmony is false, following simple test show this:
>>>>
>>>> ServerSocket serverSocket = new ServerSocket();
>>>> System.out.println(serverSocket.getReuseAddress());
>>>>
>>>> and I found it's introduced by commit r723103, and the code set default
>>>> value is removed intended, so I think there must be a reason. From spec,
>>>> it's undefined:
>>>> When a ServerSocket is created the initial setting of SO_REUSEADDR is not
>>>> defined
>>>>
>>>> So both Harmony and RI are reasonable.
>>>>
>>>> Should we follow RI or mark it as non-bug difference and correct the test
>>>> case?
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Best Regards,
>>>> Regis.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>> --
>> Best Regards,
>> Regis.
>>
> 
> 
> 


-- 
Best Regards,
Regis.

Mime
View raw message