Code Review Request 7142596: RMI JPRT tests are failing

Stuart Marks stuart.marks at
Tue Jul 10 00:02:23 UTC 2012

On 7/9/12 11:14 AM, Darryl Mocek wrote:
>> ***
>> The testing of the message string from the IOException causes me great
>> concern. This message is defined all the way over in
>>, and while it's not localized, it does seem
>> like a pretty fragile dependency. I mean, changing some exception
>> message in might cause an RMI Activation test to fail??!?
>> (Sorry.)
>> Certainly we want to ignore spurious errors, and it sounds from the
>> comment like normal termination of rmid causes these exceptions to be
>> thrown. But I'm wondering if rmid crashes, won't we get the same
>> exception and ignore it, improperly?
>> I don't know what the right thing to do is here. It seems like there
>> ought to be a more definitive way to distinguish between normal
>> termination and pipe closure from an error.
> I don't see a simple solution right now. I suggest we table this issue and
> re-visit it after the commit. Another option is to not include the fix for Bug
> #7161503 with this fix until this issue has been addressed.

Tabling this discussion until after the commit is OK. It would be good to have 
a comment that indicates that testing the exception string is a stopgap until 
we find a better way to distinguish the exceptions.

>> ***
>> Not really a big deal, but the way the second registry is created
>> seems somewhat roundabout. It's not clear to me why the code can't
>> just do this:
>> Registry registryImpl1 = TestLibrary.createRegistryOnUnusedPort();
>> Registry registryImpl2 = TestLibrary.createRegistryOnUnusedPort();
>> int port1 = TestLibrary.getRegistryPort(registryImpl1);
>> int port2 = TestLibrary.getRegistryPort(registryImpl2);
> This turned out to be an issue with calling LocateRegitry.createRegistry(0),
> which occurs in TestLibrary.createRegistryOnUnusedPort(). If
> LocateRegitry.createRegistry(0) is called within the same VM multiple times,
> after the first registry is created (and not destroyed), the subsequent calls
> will fail. See the comment above creating the second registry line:
> // Need to get a random port for the second registry.
> However, this really isn't the right solution, so I modified
> TestLibrary.createRegistryOnUnusedPort to catch ExportException (which is
> thrown if the above issue occurs), get a random port, and attempt to create a
> registry on that port. See updated TestLibrary. MultipleRegistries has been
> changed to what you have above as a result.

OK, I'll look at your updates when you publish the revised webrev.

It might be reasonable to consider avoiding LocateRegistry.createRegistry(0) if 
it has this behavior, and instead (from within the test library) 
unconditionally call getUnusedRandomPort() and then createRegistry() on that port.


More information about the core-libs-dev mailing list