RFR: 8146213, 8133093: java/nio/channels/ServerSocketChannel/AdaptServerSocket.java failed intermittently with Connection refused and Accept did not time out

[Hamlin Li]

Hi everyone,

As Brian is not reviewer, would you please help to further review the 
code change based on Brian's comments.
bugs:
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8146213, Test 
java/nio/channels/ServerSocketChannel/AdaptServerSocket.java failed 
intermittently with Connection refused,
and https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8133093, Test 
java/nio/channels/ServerSocketChannel/AdaptServerSocket.java failed with 
Accept did not time out.
webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mli/8146213/webrev.01/

Hi Brian,

Thanks for the comments, I have done the jcheck format the commit 
message locally.

-Hamlin

On 2016/1/15 7:02, Brian Burkhalter wrote:
> Hi Hamlin,
>
> On Jan 13, 2016, at 7:32 PM, Hamlin Li <huaming.li at oracle.com 
> <mailto:huaming.li at oracle.com>> wrote:
>
>> Would you please help to review the fix for below bugs?
>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8146213, Test 
>> java/nio/channels/ServerSocketChannel/AdaptServerSocket.java failed 
>> intermittently with Connection refused,
>> andhttps://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8133093, Test 
>> java/nio/channels/ServerSocketChannel/AdaptServerSocket.java failed 
>> with Accept did not time out.
>>
>> webrev :http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mli/8146213/webrev.00/ 
>> <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Emli/8146213/webrev.00/>
>
> This looks OK to me aside from the following two points:
>
> 1. At line 2, 2013 should be changed to 2016
>
> The general approach for copyright years is discussed in 
> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/openjfx-dev/2015-March/016757.html. 
> I could not locate a specification for this in the OpenJDK guidelines 
> which does not of course indicate it is not there.
>
> 2. The changeset is missing a comment
>
> See the section “Formatting a Changeset Comment” in 
> http://openjdk.java.net/guide/producingChangeset.html. In a case such 
> as this where there is more than one issue there should be one bugid 
> line per issue. Also as you do not yet have commit rights to JDK 9, 
> the contributed-by line should be included with your e-mail address.
>
> I don’t know whether you’ve done it already, but you should run jcheck 
> (http://openjdk.java.net/projects/code-tools/jcheck/) on the patch and 
> correct any problems. These commonly devolve to either trailing 
> whitespace in a file or an invalid reviewer attribution. The 
> whitespace may be corrected using 
> <FOREST_ROOT>/make/scripts/normalizer.pl. Note that if you are using 
> the mercurial Mq extension, you will need to run “hg qref” after 
> normalizing any files.
>
> Lastly, the labels “noreg-self” and “test-only” should I believe be 
> added to both JBS issues.
>
> Note that I am not a JDK Reviewer so I cannot formally approve the 
> review request.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Brian

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/nio-dev/attachments/20160115/26dcf0ce/attachment-0001.html>