RFR of JDK-8171133: java/rmi/registry/reexport/Reexport.java, there is a missing case check in createReg(..)

[Hamlin Li]

Hi Roger, Daniel,

Thank you for reviewing.

On 2016/12/15 22:45, Roger Riggs wrote:
> Hi Hamlin,
>
> If this is supposed to fix the call from line 68: then doesn't the 
> test for reg != null
> at line 70 already have the same effect?
Please consider the situation: LocateRegistry.createRegistry(port) in 
createReg(true, port) does not throw exception but just return null when 
remoteOk is true. this case is missed by current test. Although we know 
that should not happen by checking the product code, but the test should 
not assume how it is implemented.
And I think the patch will make logic more clear, maybe we could remove 
the check of reg != null at the same time after modify the code in 
createReg(...).

Thank you
-Hamlin
>
> Roger
>
>
> On 12/14/2016 10:19 PM, Hamlin Li wrote:
>> Would you please review the below patch?
>>
>> bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8171133
>> webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mli/8171133/webrev.00/
>>
>> java/rmi/registry/reexport/Reexport.java, there is a missing case 
>> check in createReg(..): if LocateRegistry.createRegistry(port) return 
>> null when port is in use.
>>
>> Thank you
>> -Hamlin
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> diff -r ddd192238fcb test/java/rmi/registry/reexport/Reexport.java
>> --- a/test/java/rmi/registry/reexport/Reexport.java    Tue Dec 13 
>> 18:47:23 2016 -0800
>> +++ b/test/java/rmi/registry/reexport/Reexport.java    Wed Dec 14 
>> 19:06:40 2016 -0800
>> @@ -105,6 +105,9 @@
>>
>>          try {
>>              reg = LocateRegistry.createRegistry(port);
>> +            if (remoteOk) {
>> +                TestLibrary.bomb("Remote registry is up, an 
>> Exception is expected!");
>> +            }
>>          } catch (Throwable e) {
>>              if (remoteOk) {
>>                  System.err.println("EXPECTING PORT IN USE EXCEPTION:");
>>
>