Hi Volker, Thank you very much for your feedback.
1. For the following code, I will do it as platform specific as you suggested. 37 /* Defines SO_REUSEPORT */ 38 #ifndef SO_REUSEPORT 39 #define SO_REUSEPORT 15 40 #endif 2. I will remove the setReusePort and getReusePort methods from Socket/ServerSocket/DiagramSocket. 3. I will remove SO_REUSEPORT from following, since they do not really have performance impact here. src/java.management/share/classes/sun/management/jdp src/jdk.jdwp.agent/unix/native/libdt_socket 4. I will follow the example of IPv6 check for reuseportSupported(), adding caching (check once) as well as relocate the native check to libnet. 5. Regarding to your following comment, I think set SO_REUSEPORT is not for every socket. The "support or not check" has already been done before going to this native function. If not supported, it won’t go here. Please let me know if my understanding is correct. - why do we unconditionally set SO_REUSEPORT for every socket created in 'Java_sun_nio_ch_Net_socket0()'? I don't think that's right. Thanks, Lucy -----Original Message----- From: Volker Simonis [mailto:volker.simo...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, December 07, 2015 9:51 AM To: Lu, Yingqi <yingqi...@intel.com>; Alan Bateman <alan.bate...@oracle.com>; Michael McMahon <michael.x.mcma...@oracle.com> Cc: Kaczmarek, Eric <eric.kaczma...@intel.com>; net-dev@openjdk.java.net; Kharbas, Kishor <kishor.khar...@intel.com> Subject: Re: Patch for adding SO_REUSEPORT socket option Hi Lucy, thanks for updating the change and sorry for the late review. It looks pretty good now. Please find my comments below: genSocketOptionRegistry.c net_util_md.h nio_util.h socket_md.h ==================== I'm a little concerned about the following code: 37 /* Defines SO_REUSEPORT */ 38 #ifndef SO_REUSEPORT 39 #define SO_REUSEPORT 15 40 #endif because the value of SO_REUSPORT is platform dependent. It's 15 on Linux, but 0x100e on Solaris and 0x0200 on MacOS X, AIX and HPUX. So we should make this platform dependent otherwise this code will break if the JDK will be compiled lets say on Solaris 10 which doesn't have SO_REUSEPORT but later runs on Solaris 11 where it will set the socket option '15' which is undefined there. Net.c ==== - you can call initialize 'reuseportsupported' by calling 'reuseportSupported0()' from Java_sun_nio_ch_Net_initIDs() which is called exactly once during class initialization (so no need for the 'reuseportsupported_set' guard). In Java_sun_nio_ch_Net_reuseportSupported()' you can then simply return 'reuseportsupported'. - why do we unconditionally set SO_REUSEPORT for every socket created in 'Java_sun_nio_ch_Net_socket0()'? I don't think that's right. src/java.management/share/classes/sun/management/jdp src/jdk.jdwp.agent/unix/native/libdt_socket =============================== - I don't think we should change these socket options. I think there's not much to win but we can get problems on platforms where SO_REUSEPORT has a different semantics. DatagramSocket.java ================ - that's probably another clean-up change, but do we really still need to support pre-1.4 DatagramSocketImpl? And as always, the copyright of all the files you've touched has to be updated to 2015 (or 2016 :) Regards, Volker On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 6:08 PM, Lu, Yingqi <yingqi...@intel.com> wrote: > Hi All, > > > > A quick check here. Does anyone get a chance to try the most recent patch? > Any feedback and comments? > > > > Thanks, > > Lucy > > > > From: Lu, Yingqi > Sent: Monday, November 30, 2015 11:25 PM > To: Lu, Yingqi <yingqi...@intel.com>; Volker Simonis > <volker.simo...@gmail.com> > > > Cc: Kaczmarek, Eric <eric.kaczma...@intel.com>; > net-dev@openjdk.java.net; Kharbas, Kishor <kishor.khar...@intel.com> > Subject: RE: Patch for adding SO_REUSEPORT socket option > > > > Hi All, > > > > Here is the most recent version of the patch. > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mcberg/jdk/6432031/webrev.05/ > > > > We already tested patch on Linux 3.4.110 kernel and 3.18 kernel with > regression tests from java.net and java.nio, and a simple program for > reuseport. We also tested the same thing on Windows platform. Results > are as expected. > > > > For the simple program, we tested Sockets.setOption, > setOption/getOption and set/getReusePort methods from java.net. > > > > Please review this version and let us know your feedback. > > > > Thanks very much for your help! > > Lucy > > > > From: net-dev [mailto:net-dev-boun...@openjdk.java.net] On Behalf Of > Lu, Yingqi > Sent: Wednesday, November 25, 2015 5:12 PM > To: Volker Simonis <volker.simo...@gmail.com> > Cc: Kaczmarek, Eric <eric.kaczma...@intel.com>; > net-dev@openjdk.java.net; Kharbas, Kishor <kishor.khar...@intel.com> > Subject: RE: Patch for adding SO_REUSEPORT socket option > > > > Here is an update. > > > > Changes are already completed locally. All the tests passed on an old > Linux kernel 3.4.110 which does not have SO_REUSEPORT. Same tests are > done on Linux 4.2 kernel before. > > > > Here are the quick information on the current implementation: > > > > 1. For multicast socket, SO_REUSEPORT will be set by default if > supported. We use Net.reuseportSupported method to check before > calling setReusePort(). If not supported, will silently continue without > setting it. > > 2. For socket, serversocket and datagramsocket, we check if > SO_REUSEPORT is supported before calling setOption/getOption and > setReusePort/ getReusePort methods. If not supported, UOE exception > will be thrown. > > 3. We modified a bug in the OptionsTest.java file. > > > > We will test Windows environment to see if it behaves the expected way. > However, we need help to test other OSes from the community J > > > > Due to the Thanksgiving holiday schedule, we will send updated webrev > package on Monday. > > > > Thank you all for your help and happy thanksgiving! > > Lucy > > > > > > From: Lu, Yingqi > Sent: Wednesday, November 25, 2015 1:23 PM > To: 'Volker Simonis' <volker.simo...@gmail.com> > Cc: Michael McMahon <michael.x.mcma...@oracle.com>; Alan Bateman > <alan.bate...@oracle.com>; Kharbas, Kishor <kishor.khar...@intel.com>; > net-dev@openjdk.java.net; Kaczmarek, Eric <eric.kaczma...@intel.com> > Subject: RE: Patch for adding SO_REUSEPORT socket option > > > > Yes, it should work! I already located the issues. Good catch! > > > > I will submit an update as soon as possible. > > > > Thanks, > > Lucy > > > > From: Volker Simonis [mailto:volker.simo...@gmail.com] > Sent: Wednesday, November 25, 2015 12:17 PM > To: Lu, Yingqi <yingqi...@intel.com> > Cc: Michael McMahon <michael.x.mcma...@oracle.com>; Alan Bateman > <alan.bate...@oracle.com>; Kharbas, Kishor <kishor.khar...@intel.com>; > net-dev@openjdk.java.net; Kaczmarek, Eric <eric.kaczma...@intel.com> > Subject: Re: Patch for adding SO_REUSEPORT socket option > > > > Yes, I indeed tested on an old kernel - but that should still work > after your change! > > On Wednesday, November 25, 2015, Lu, Yingqi <yingqi...@intel.com> wrote: > > Hi Volker, > > Thanks very much for letting me know. I actually took the related > regression tests and they all passed. I think you tested on an old > kernel which does not have SO_REUSEPORT enabled. In this case, it should not > set the flag. > > Let me double check. I will get back to you as soon as I can. > > Thanks, > Lucy > > -----Original Message----- > From: Volker Simonis [mailto:volker.simo...@gmail.com] > Sent: Wednesday, November 25, 2015 10:46 AM > To: Lu, Yingqi <yingqi...@intel.com> > Cc: Michael McMahon <michael.x.mcma...@oracle.com>; Alan Bateman > <alan.bate...@oracle.com>; Kharbas, Kishor <kishor.khar...@intel.com>; > net-dev@openjdk.java.net; Kaczmarek, Eric <eric.kaczma...@intel.com> > Subject: Re: Patch for adding SO_REUSEPORT socket option > > Hi Lucy, > > I took a brief look at your changes but there seems to be something > not right. I can't understand for example why you unconditionally try > to set SO_REUSEPORT on all sockets in Java_sun_nio_ch_Net_socket0() ? > > Also which your changes applied, simple regression tests like > test/java/net/SocketOption/OptionsTest.java start to fail even on > Linux/x86_64: > > java.net.SocketException: Protocol not available > at java.net.PlainDatagramSocketImpl.socketSetOption0(Native Method) > at > java.net.PlainDatagramSocketImpl.socketSetOption(PlainDatagramSocketImpl.java:85) > at > java.net.AbstractPlainDatagramSocketImpl.setOption(AbstractPlainDatagramSocketImpl.java:314) > at java.net.DatagramSocket.setReusePort(DatagramSocket.java:1145) > at java.net.MulticastSocket.<init>(MulticastSocket.java:180) > at java.net.MulticastSocket.<init>(MulticastSocket.java:142) > at OptionsTest.doMcSocketTests(OptionsTest.java:131) > at OptionsTest.main(OptionsTest.java:247) > at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method) > at > sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:62) > at > sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:43) > at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:520) > at > com.sun.javatest.regtest.agent.MainWrapper$MainThread.run(MainWrapper.java:92) > at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:747) > > > Can you please make sure that your changes at least don't break the > regression tests? > > Thank you and best regards, > Volker > > On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 6:04 PM, Lu, Yingqi <yingqi...@intel.com> wrote: >> Hi Michael/Alan/Volker, >> >> Following your suggestions, here is the most recent version (Version >> 4) of the patch. >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mcberg/jdk/6432031/webrev.04/ >> >> In this version, we have done following changes: >> >> 1. Add reuseportSupported() method in sun.nio.ch.Net and its >> implementation in Net.c. Only add SO_REUSEPORT to the option set when >> it is supported. In all the tests, we use supportedOptions method to >> test if SO_REUSEPORT is supported or not. >> >> 2. We dropped NetworkChannels from the Javadoc. We removed Linux >> specific wordings in Javadoc for SO_REUSEPORT. >> >> 3. We expand the feature to all UNIX based OSes. However, we do not >> have all the OSes to test. Please test and let us know if there is >> anything missing in either compilation or run time. >> >> Please review the patch and let us know your feedback. Thank you very >> much for your help! >> >> Thanks, >> Lucy >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: net-dev [mailto:net-dev-boun...@openjdk.java.net] On Behalf Of >> Michael McMahon >> Sent: Monday, November 23, 2015 2:54 AM >> To: Volker Simonis <volker.simo...@gmail.com>; Alan Bateman >> <alan.bate...@oracle.com> >> Cc: Kharbas, Kishor <kishor.khar...@intel.com>; >> net-dev@openjdk.java.net >> Subject: Re: Patch for adding SO_REUSEPORT socket option >> >> I agree we should enable the option on all platforms. >> We can add the code to do that and run the tests. >> >> On the existing use of SO_REUSEPORT on AIX and Mac it appears that is >> set to emulate expected behavior on other platforms when SO_REUSEADDR >> is set for datagram sockets. >> The expectation is that ports can be reused for datagram sockets and >> the JCK tests this. So, I guess we have to leave this behavior by >> default, except if SO_REUSEPORT is explicitly disabled maybe. Though >> this code hasn't been forward ported to JDK 9 yet. >> >> For reference, SO_REUSEPORT on Linux is documented here >> http://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man7/socket.7.html >> >> - Michael >> >> On 23/11/15 09:13, Volker Simonis wrote: >>> Hi Lucy, >>> >>> in general I support the addition of SO_REUSEPORT to the set of >>> standard socket options. However for me the problem is not that this >>> new option is not supported on all platforms, but instead that it >>> has such different semantics on different platforms. If you look at >>> the code, you'll see that we already implicitly set SO_REUSEPORT on >>> Mac and AIX for datagram sockets for which we set SO_REUSEADDR. So >>> maybe we have to rethink this, once SO_REUSEPORT becomes available >>> as a standard socket option. >>> >>> I like the new wording you've posted for JavaDoc of SO_REUSEPORT, >>> but I think the sentence: >>> >>> * Although SO_REUSEADDR option already enables similar >>> * functionality, SO_REUSEPORT prevents port hijacking and >>> * distributes the involving datagrams evenly across all of the >>> * receiving threads. >>> >>> refers to a Linux-specific implementation detail which shouldn't be >>> mentioned in the general documentation. You already have the >>> sentence "The exact semantics of this socket option are socket type >>> and system dependent" which should let everybody think twice before >>> using this option. I'm also not sure about the link to the Linux >>> article but I again think it is inappropriate in a general API >>> documentation (otherwise we would have to add links for every >>> platform which supports SO_REUSEPORT). >>> >>> As far as I can see (and please correct me if I'm wrong) you >>> actually only add the new option for Linux platforms. But this >>> socket option is also supported on Solaris (>= 11), MacOS X, AIX. So >>> could you please enable it on the other platforms as well. >>> >>> Finally I want to mention the good stackoverflow article at >>> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/14388706/socket-options-so-reusea >>> d d r-and-so-reuseport-how-do-they-differ-do-they-mean-t >>> which covers the topic SO_REUSEADDR vs. SO_REUSEPORT quite well. And >>> I've collected the man-page entries for SO_REUSEADDR and >>> SO_REUSEPORT for the systems I have (unfortunately, I couldn't find >>> an updated Linux man-page which mentions SO_REUSEPORT): >>> >>> Linux >>> ===== >>> >>> SO_REUSEADDR >>> Indicates that the rules used in validating addresses >>> supplied in a bind(2) call should allow reuse of local >>> addresses. For AF_INET sockets this means that a socket >>> may bind, except when there is an active listening >>> socket bound to the address. When the listening socket >>> is bound to INADDR_ANY with a specific port then it is >>> not possi- ble to bind to this port for any local >>> address. Argument is an integer boolean flag. >>> >>> Linux will only allow port reuse with the SO_REUSEADDR option >>> when this option was set both in the previous program that >>> performed a bind(2) to the port and in the program that wants >>> to reuse the port. This differs from some implementations >>> (e.g., FreeBSD) where only the later program needs to set the >>> SO_REUSEADDR option. Typically this difference is invisi- ble, >>> since, for example, a server program is designed to always set >>> this option. >>> >>> MacOS X >>> ======= >>> SO_REUSEADDR enables local address reuse >>> SO_REUSEPORT enables duplicate address and port bindings >>> >>> SO_REUSEADDR indicates that the rules used in validating >>> addresses supplied in a bind(2) call should allow reuse of local >>> addresses. >>> >>> SO_REUSEPORT allows completely duplicate bindings by multiple >>> processes if they all set SO_REUSEPORT before bind- ing the port. >>> This option permits multiple instances of a program to each >>> receive UDP/IP multicast or broadcast datagrams destined for the >>> bound port. >>> >>> Solaris >>> ======= >>> >>> SO_REUSEADDR enable/disable local address reuse >>> >>> >>> SO_REUSEPORT enable/disable local port reuse for >>> PF_INET/PF_INET6 socket >>> >>> The SO_REUSEADDR/SO_REUSEPORT options indi- cate that the rules >>> used in validating addresses and ports supplied in a >>> bind(3SOCKET) call should allow reuse of local addresses or >>> ports. >>> >>> AIX >>> === >>> >>> SO_REUSEADDR >>> Specifies that the rules used in validating >>> addresses supplied by a bind subroutine should >>> allow reuse of a local port. A particular IP >>> address can only be bound once to the same >>> port. This option enables or disables reuse of >>> local ports. >>> >>> SO_REUSEADDR allows an application to explicitly >>> deny subsequent bind subroutine to the port/address >>> of the socket with SO_REUSEADDR set. This allows an >>> application to block other applications from >>> binding with the bind subroutine. >>> >>> SO_REUSEPORT >>> Specifies that the rules used in validating >>> addresses supplied by a bind subroutine should >>> allow reuse of a local port/address >>> combination. Each binding of the port/address >>> combination must specify the SO_REUSEPORT socket >>> option. This option enables or disables the reuse >>> of local port/address combinations. >>> >>> HPUX >>> ==== >>> >>> SO_REUSEADDR >>> (int; boolean; AF_INET sockets only) If enabled, allows >>> a local address to be reused in subsequent calls to >>> bind(). Default: disallowed. >>> >>> SO_REUSEPORT >>> (int; boolean; AF_INET sockets only) If enabled, allows >>> a local address and port to be reused in subsequent >>> calls to bind(). Default: disallowed. >>> >>> Setting the SO_REUSEADDR option allows the local socket address >>> to be reused in subsequent calls to bind(). This permits >>> multiple SOCK_STREAM sockets to be bound to the same local >>> address, as long as all existing sockets with the desired local >>> address are in a connected state before bind() is called for a >>> new socket. For SOCK_DGRAM sockets, SO_REUSEADDR allows >>> multiple sockets to receive UDP multicast datagrams addressed to >>> the bound port number. For all SOCK_DGRAM sockets bound to the >>> same local address, SO_REUSEADDR must be set before calling >>> bind(). >>> >>> Setting the SO_REUSEPORT option allows multiple SOCK_DGRAM >>> sockets to share the same address and port. Each one of those >>> sockets, including the first one to use that port, must specify >>> this option before calling bind(). >>> >>> Regards, >>> Volker >>> >>> >>> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 9:00 AM, Alan Bateman >>> <alan.bate...@oracle.com> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> On 23/11/2015 04:12, Lu, Yingqi wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi Alan, >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> One more question please J I want to make sure I understand >>>> correctly on your following suggestion. In order to use >>>> supportedOptions method to test SO_REUSEPORT, I will need to first >>>> write a native function to check if SO_REUSEPORT is supported. >>>> Then, in the defaultOptions method, I do a conditional add for >>>> StandardSocketOptions.SO_REUSEPORT >>>> if it is supported on the platform? Is this a preferred way to >>>> implement? Please let me know! >>>> >>>> >>>> Yes as supportedOptions() shouldn't return SO_REUSEPORT in the set >>>> when it's not supported. It might be simplest to put that code in >>>> sun.nio.ch.Net, maybe isReusePortSupported or some such method. In >>>> the implementation >>>> (Net.c) then you can return true or false depending on the platform >>>> and maybe kernel version. >>>> >>>> -Alan >>
