8221303: sun/management/jmxremote/bootstrap/JMXInterfaceBindingTest.java fails due to java.rmi.server.ExportException: Port already in use
Severin Gehwolf
sgehwolf at redhat.com
Thu Jul 18 08:13:18 UTC 2019
Hi Daniil,
On Wed, 2019-07-17 at 18:26 -0700, Daniil Titov wrote:
> Hi Chris,
>
> Yes, I added output.reportDiagnosticSummary() in webrev-01, but removed it
> In webrev-02, and later restored it in webrev-03.
>
> When the test runs of retries output.getExitValue() is set to 1 (COMMUNICATION_ERROR_EXIT_VAL)
> (the "exitValue =1 " in the previous email).
>
> Please review a new version of the fix that has an explicit error message printed
> if the test runs out of retries (line 168).
>
> Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dtitov/8221303/webrev.04/
> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8221303
This looks reasonable to me. Thanks for fixing it!
Thanks,
Severin
> Thanks!
> --Daniil
>
> On 7/17/19, 5:33 PM, "Chris Plummer" <chris.plummer at oracle.com>
> wrote:
>
> Hi Daniil,
>
> I'm confused now. I mentioned output.reportDiagnosticSummary()
> because I
> thought I saw it in your webrev-02. Now I don't. Maybe I had
> glanced
> back at webrev-01 and saw it there. One issue with exceptions in
> the
> output that are not considered errors is that if later there is
> an
> error, mdash wills show the exception as one of (possible
> multiple)
> reasons for the failure, so it's good to avoid if possible. Looks
> like
> what you have now is ok.
>
> I have a question about what happens if you run out of retries.
> What is
> output.getExitValue() set to? Also, I think you should print an
> an
> explicit error message indicating you've run out of retries.
>
> thanks,
>
> Chris
>
> On 7/17/19 4:36 PM, Daniil Titov wrote:
> > Hi Chris,
> >
> > output.reportDiagnosticSummary() prints the output from the
> process (both stdout and stderr) and the exit value to the test's
> stderr.
> > In case if the port is already in use it prints the following:
> >
> > stdout: [];
> > stderr: [Error: JMX connector server communication error:
> service:jmx:rmi://127.0.0.1:9101
> > jdk.internal.agent.AgentConfigurationError:
> java.rmi.server.ExportException: Port already in use: 9101; nested
> exception is:
> > java.net.BindException: Address already in use
> > at
> jdk.management.agent/sun.management.jmxremote.ConnectorBootstrap.expo
> rtMBeanServer(ConnectorBootstrap.java:820)
> > at
> jdk.management.agent/sun.management.jmxremote.ConnectorBootstrap.star
> tRemoteConnectorServer(ConnectorBootstrap.java:479)
> > at
> jdk.management.agent/jdk.internal.agent.Agent.startAgent(Agent.java:4
> 47)
> > at
> jdk.management.agent/jdk.internal.agent.Agent.startAgent(Agent.java:5
> 99)
> > Caused by: java.rmi.server.ExportException: Port already in
> use: 9101; nested exception is:
> > < I skipped the rest>
> > ]
> > exitValue = 1
> >
> > It makes sense to have it called if the test fails, otherwise
> this information would be missed in the test output.
> > Please review the new version of the fix that has the call to
> output.reportDiagnosticSummary() restored.
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dtitov/8221303/webrev.03/
> > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8221303
> >
> > -Daniil
> >
> > On 7/17/19, 3:58 PM, "Chris Plummer" <chris.plummer at oracle.com
> > wrote:
> >
> > What does output.reportDiagnosticSummary() print out then
> the port is
> > already in use, and have you made this happen with your
> fixes in place?
> >
> > Chris
> >
> > On 7/17/19 3:20 PM, Daniil Titov wrote:
> > > Hi Chris and Alex,
> > >
> > > Please review a new version of the fix that moves the
> diagnostic output for the test failure to run()
> > > method after the number of retry attempts is exceeded.
> It also includes other corrections that
> > > you suggested.
> > >
> > > Thanks!
> > >
> > > Webrev:
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dtitov/8221303/webrev.02/
> > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8221303
> > >
> > > --Best regards,
> > > Daniil
> > >
> > >
> > > On 7/17/19, 1:47 PM, "Chris Plummer" <
> chris.plummer at oracle.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Daniil,
> > >
> > > I think you can remove "Ok" from the following
> message:
> > >
> > > 237 System.out.println("DEBUG: OK. Spawned java
> process terminated
> > > with expected exit code of "
> > > 238 +
> STOP_PROCESS_EXIT_VAL);
> > >
> > > It's somewhat misleading since the test can still
> fail. I think the
> > > following is also misleading:
> > >
> > > 249 if (testFailed) {
> > > 250 output.reportDiagnosticSummar
> y();
> > > 251 if
> (output.getStderr().contains("Port already in
> > > use")) {
> > > 252 // Need to retry
> > > 253 return true;
> > > 254 }
> > > 255 }
> > >
> > > The test can still pass after this happens, right?
> And I think there are
> > > other "Test FAILURE" error message that can appear
> just before this.
> > > Perhaps the code above should add a println that
> indicates that there
> > > will be a retry attempt since the failure was due
> to the port being in use.
> > >
> > > Otherwise looks good.
> > >
> > > thanks,
> > >
> > > Chris
> > >
> > > On 7/17/19 1:30 PM, Alex Menkov wrote:
> > > > Hi Daniil,
> > > >
> > > > The fix looks good in general.
> > > > Couple cosmetic notes (no new webrev required):
> > > >
> > > > 162 needRetry = runTest();
> > > > 163 }
> > > > 164 while (needRetry && (attempts++
> < MAX_RETRY_ATTEMTS));
> > > > Please move "while" to the prev line:
> > > > 163 } while (needRetry &&
> (attempts++ < MAX_RETRY_ATTEMTS));
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > 242 System.out.println("Test
> FAILURE on" + name +
> > > > " reason: The expected line \"" + READY_MSG
> > > > 243 + "\" is not
> present in the process
> > > > output");
> > > > Please add space: "Test FAILURE on " + name
> > > >
> > > > --alex
> > > >
> > > > On 07/17/2019 12:46, Daniil Titov wrote:
> > > >> Hi Chris,
> > > >>
> > > >>> It's a little unclear to me why you moved
> from ProcessThread to
> > > >>> TestProcessThread + Process. An explanation
> of that would make it
> > > >>> easier
> > > >>> to understand many of the changes.
> > > >>
> > > >> There are two reasons for that:
> > > >> 1) For every network interface the test starts
> a separate thread
> > > >> that runs the test for this interface. We want
> that if the test fails
> > > >> due to the bind error the thread not to
> exit but try to repeat
> > > >> the test several times.
> jdk.test.lib.thread.ProcessThread doesn't
> > > >> allow this.
> > > >> 2) To filter out the cases when the test fails
> due to the bind error
> > > >> we need to parse the process output.
> jdk.test.lib.thread.ProcessThread
> > > >> registers its own pumps for stdin and
> sdtout (by calling
> > > >> ProcessTools.startProcess()) that consume all
> output of the process
> > > >> and prevent
> > > >> the output analyzer from collecting this
> output.
> > > >> Thanks!
> > > >> --Daniil
> > > >>
> > > >> On 7/17/19, 12:11 PM, "Chris Plummer" <
> chris.plummer at oracle.com> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> Hi Daniil,
> > > >> It's a little unclear to me why you
> moved from
> > > >> ProcessThread to
> > > >> TestProcessThread + Process. An explanation
> of that would make
> > > >> it easier
> > > >> to understand many of the changes.
> > > >> thanks,
> > > >> Chris
> > > >> On 7/11/19 10:16 AM, Daniil Titov
> wrote:
> > > >> > Please review the change that fixes an
> intermittent failure of
> > > >>
> sun/management/jmxremote/bootstrap/JMXInterfaceBindingTest.java
> > > >> > test due to ports collision. The tests
> finds all network
> > > >> interfaces and for every interface starts a
> separate process that tests
> > > >> > the connection to JMX agent server for a
> specific
> > > >> ports/interface combination.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > The test was changed to retry in case of
> the failure. If the
> > > >> subprocess fails to bind and the number
> > > >> > of retry attempts doesn't exceed the
> limit a new pair of
> > > >> random ports is selected and the test is run
> again.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Webrev:
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dtitov/8221303/webrev.01/
> > > >> > Bug:
> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8221303
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Thanks!
> > > >> > --Daniil
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
More information about the serviceability-dev
mailing list