[ping] RFR 8027058: sun/management/jmxremote/bootstrap/RmiBootstrapTest.sh Failed to initialize connector

[Staffan Larsen]

Looks good!

Thanks,
/Staffan

On 30 okt 2013, at 12:27, Jaroslav Bachorik <jaroslav.bachorik at oracle.com> wrote:

> Could I have a reviewer to take a look at this, please?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> -JB-
> 
> On 23.10.2013 18:18, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
>> Looks good to me!
>> 
>> -- daniel
>> 
>> On 10/23/13 6:13 PM, Jaroslav Bachorik wrote:
>>> On 23.10.2013 17:49, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
>>>> On 10/23/13 5:35 PM, Jaroslav Bachorik wrote:
>>>>> On 23.10.2013 17:32, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
>>>>>> Hi Jaroslav,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Have you considered setting a limit on the number of tries you
>>>>>> will attempt, rather than just 'while (true)'?
>>>>>> It might avoid creating a busy while loop in case there's some global
>>>>>> networking issue.
>>>>> 
>>>>> It might be difficult to come up with the right number. Probably a few
>>>>> hundred could be enough even for cases when you hit a contiguous range
>>>>> of ports occupied by different applications.
>>>> 
>>>> Instead of using an arbitrary 12424 as the default starting point
>>>> it could be interesting to try with the first available port + 1;
>>>> 
>>>> something like:
>>>> 
>>>>         final int startPort;
>>>>         try (ServerSocket s = new ServerSocket(0)) {
>>>>                 startPort = s.getLocalPort() + 1;
>>>>         }
>>>>         System.out.println("startPort: "+startPort);
>>>> 
>>>> But maybe that's what the test that calls the code is already doing?
>>> 
>>> Nope, it's hardcoded.
>>> 
>>> I've added the cap for the number of consecutive checks for a port being
>>> available and dynamic lookup of the first available port (if it's not
>>> specified by the system property "rmi.port").
>>> 
>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jbachorik/8027058/webrev.01
>>> 
>>> Thanks for the additional ideas!
>>> 
>>> -JB-
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> -- daniel
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> -JB-
>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> -- daniel
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On 10/23/13 5:16 PM, Jaroslav Bachorik wrote:
>>>>>>> Please, review the following test change:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Issue:  https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8027058
>>>>>>> Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jbachorik/8027058/webrev.00
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> The test fails when the requested port is unavailable. The test logic
>>>>>>> already runs the subtests with different port numbers (increasing the
>>>>>>> port number for each subtest) and this patch adds the logic to
>>>>>>> increase
>>>>>>> the port number in case of the subtest failure caused by
>>>>>>> BindException.
>>>>>>> This way the test is able to "autodiscover" free ports and run the
>>>>>>> bootstrap subtests successfully.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> -JB-
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>