On 28/05/2019 15:39, Chris Hegarty wrote:
Please review this small change to ServerSocket::toString so that it
correctly implements its specified behaviour ( to reveal the local
address if SecurityManager::checkConnect succeeds ). Looks like this was
a minor oversight in the implementation that w
Hi Alan,
On 29/05/2019 07:29, Alan Bateman wrote:
The purpose of L237-244 isn't clear. Maybe it's useful to print the
count of interfaces supporting multicast but it is necessary to throw
SkipException when the count is 0? For debugging purposes I think it
would be much prefer if the value of
On 29/05/2019 08:08, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
The idea is that if a test machine has no IPv4 and no
IPv6 multicast interfaces then it's probably misconfigured.
Also if a regression is introduced that causes this to happen,
then we'd probably want to see it.
AFAIK the SkippedException is a good matc
On 29/05/2019 08:23, Alan Bateman wrote:
AFAIK the SkippedException is a good match for that.
I don't like the dependency on jtreg.SkippedException but if you find it
useful then okay.
Would you prefer to throw AssertionError instead? It's also
a possibility. Chris thought it might be "too st
On 29/05/2019 08:28, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
Would you prefer to throw AssertionError instead? It's also
a possibility. Chris thought it might be "too strong".
It might be odd to have a test system configured without multicast
enabled but it's not wrong. So I think the test should pass.
:
Right
> On 29 May 2019, at 08:40, Alan Bateman wrote:
>
> On 29/05/2019 08:28, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
>>
>> Would you prefer to throw AssertionError instead? It's also
>> a possibility. Chris thought it might be "too strong".
> It might be odd to have a test system configured without multicast enabled
Hi,
Thanks, Arno. This looks good to me, too.
@Chris: We were running with this patch in our nightly test system for a while
now and we don't see regressions. But looking forward to hear from your results.
Best regards
Christoph
> -Original Message-
> From: net-dev On Behalf Of Zeller
On 29/05/19 09:19, Chris Hegarty wrote:
This already exists.
NetworkConfiguration.printSystemConfiguration(PrintStream)
I think there needs to be a balance between readability and
diagnosability. It's often the case that much debugging statements are
added to a test when investigating a failure.
On 29/05/2019 09:19, Chris Hegarty wrote:
:
The test already has a test library dependency, so the addition of
SkippedException does not introduce any new significant burden
for standalone testing.
There are a couple of tests in the nio/channels area that are useful to
run outside of the jtreg e
Alan,
On 29/05/2019 08:01, Alan Bateman wrote:
On 28/05/2019 15:39, Chris Hegarty wrote:
...
https://cr.openjdk.java.net/~chegar/8224730/webrev.00/
This looks good. I just wonder if there is any merit is extending the
test to exercise the socket adaptors returned by
SocketChannel::socketand S
On 29/05/2019 12:36, Chris Hegarty wrote:
Good idea. I've expanded the test to cover the ServerSocket adapter too.
Good news is that it found no issues ( but of course will increase
coverage and catch possible future accidental breakages ).
Webrev:
https://cr.openjdk.java.net/~chegar/8224730/
Alan,
On 29/05/2019 12:50, Alan Bateman wrote:
On 29/05/2019 12:36, Chris Hegarty wrote:
Good idea. I've expanded the test to cover the ServerSocket adapter too.
Good news is that it found no issues ( but of course will increase
coverage and catch possible future accidental breakages ).
Webre
>
> For the record I ran Arthur's webrev.01 through our test system and
> got no failures (just tested BasicMulticastTests.java).
>
> best regards,
>
> -- daniel
>
Thanks.
Moved NetworkConfiguration.printSystemConfiguration() to the beginning,
removed counting and printing the number of interfaces
On 29/05/2019 17:27, Arthur Eubanks wrote:
:
Moved NetworkConfiguration.printSystemConfiguration() to the
beginning, removed counting and printing the number of
interfaces/throwing SkippedException.
new webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aeubanks/8224645/webrev.02/
This looks okay to me, the
>
> Moved NetworkConfiguration.printSystemConfiguration() to the beginning,
> removed counting and printing the number of interfaces/throwing
> SkippedException.
> new webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aeubanks/8224645/webrev.02/
>
> This looks okay to me, the only thing is that the NetworkConfig
On 29/05/2019 14:48, Chris Hegarty wrote:
:
On 29/05/2019 12:50, Alan Bateman wrote:
One suggestion is to rename the socketAdapterXXX methods to
serverSocketAdaptorXXX to align with the class name. Otherwise looks
good.
Yes, that is better.
Updated webrev:
https://cr.openjdk.java.net/~c
16 matches
Mail list logo
