test: replace port in cluster dgram reuse test #12901

arturgvieira-zz · 2017-05-08T18:02:42Z

Replaced common.PORT with zero in the following test.
test-cluster-dgram-reuse.js

Refs: #12376

Checklist

make -j4 test (UNIX), or vcbuild test (Windows) passes
commit message follows commit guidelines

Affected core subsystem(s)

test

watilde · 2017-05-08T21:58:43Z

ci: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-pull-request/7953/

arturgvieira-zz · 2017-05-08T22:07:21Z

test/parallel/test-net-socket-destroy-twice.js

@@ -23,7 +23,7 @@
 const common = require('../common');
 const net = require('net');

-const conn = net.createConnection(common.PORT);
+const conn = net.createConnection(0);


Would net.connect() work better here?

Port 0 with connect() or createConnection() makes no sense, except perhaps for connections that will fail for other reasons already (in which case it should probably have a comment explaining that).

(Which it looks like this one is expected to fail because there's nothing listening on the port. But then the issue is: Does this test still test the thing it was written to test? I don't know the answer to that.)

Trott · 2017-05-08T22:47:01Z

test/parallel/test-tls-client-default-ciphers.js

@@ -40,7 +40,7 @@ function test1() {
  };

  try {
-    tls.connect(common.PORT);
+    tls.connect(0);


Same: port 0 on connect() makes no sense. Comment needed if this change is correct.

Trott · 2017-05-08T22:50:48Z

test/parallel/test-tls-connect.js

@@ -37,7 +37,7 @@ const path = require('path');
  const cert = fs.readFileSync(path.join(common.fixturesDir, 'test_cert.pem'));
  const key = fs.readFileSync(path.join(common.fixturesDir, 'test_key.pem'));

-  const options = {cert: cert, key: key, port: common.PORT};
+  const options = {cert: cert, key: key, port: 0};


Same as other comments regarding connect() and port 0.

Trott · 2017-05-08T22:50:57Z

test/parallel/test-tls-connect.js

@@ -51,7 +51,7 @@ const path = require('path');
  const conn = tls.connect({
    cert: cert,
    key: key,
-    port: common.PORT,
+    port: 0,


Same as other comments regarding connect() and port 0.

Trott

I'm skeptical that the port 0 connect() calls are still testing what they are supposed to test. At a minimum, they need a comment.

arturgvieira-zz · 2017-05-08T23:11:44Z

The comment, I'm trying to understand how to phrase it, please let me know if this is correct.

If you use common.PORT, then common/index.js assigns process.env.NODE_COMMON_PORT | 12376 so that would be the same thing as well, right.

Trott · 2017-05-08T23:16:08Z

Let's say that common.PORT is 12346 (which it often is).

net.connect(common.PORT) will be "connect to port 12346". Often port 12346 isn't listening. In that case, I get ECONNREFUSED.

net.connect(0) is invalid. In that case, I get EADDRNOTAVAIL.

So changing net.connect(common.PORT) to net.connect(0) fundamentally changes the way the network connection fails. It is therefore dangerous (or at least unwise) to make this change without fully understanding how the test works and what is being tested. You may be causing the test to succeed for the wrong reasons.

arturgvieira-zz · 2017-05-08T23:19:30Z

Understood. What do you think would be a better solution. If you could help me I would really appreciate it. I'm on #node-dev.

Trott · 2017-05-08T23:28:26Z

Understood. What do you think would be a better solution.

It requires a case-by-case analysis. In some cases, using port 0 will be fine. In others, moving to sequential will be the better solution.

Trott · 2017-05-08T23:29:18Z

By the way, moving to sequential for these is always fine. It's might not always the best solution. But it is an acceptable solution.
¯\(ツ)/¯

arturgvieira-zz · 2017-05-08T23:39:31Z

@Trott Thanks for the direction, I will try to look a little closer at each test.

arturgvieira-zz · 2017-05-09T02:15:46Z

I have shrunk this PR to just the first file. Might be better to go over those other tests separately.

scope of PR has been reduced, eliminating my concerns

lpinca · 2017-05-09T12:21:06Z

CI 2: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-pull-request/7960/

lpinca · 2017-05-12T10:48:03Z

test/parallel/test-cluster-dgram-reuse.js

@@ -37,4 +37,4 @@ function close() {
 }

 for (let i = 0; i < 2; i++)
-  dgram.createSocket({ type: 'udp4', reuseAddr: true }).bind(common.PORT, next);
+  dgram.createSocket({ type: 'udp4', reuseAddr: true }).bind(0, next);


At a second glance, it seems that this will make the two sockets use two different ports which is not what we want here. Something like this should work.

diff --git a/test/parallel/test-cluster-dgram-reuse.js b/test/parallel/test-cluster-dgram-reuse.js index aed565a380..3e7868bc30 100644 --- a/test/parallel/test-cluster-dgram-reuse.js +++ b/test/parallel/test-cluster-dgram-reuse.js @@ -17,24 +17,22 @@ if (cluster.isMaster) { return; } -const sockets = []; -function next() { - sockets.push(this); - if (sockets.length !== 2) - return; - - // Work around health check issue - process.nextTick(() => { - for (let i = 0; i < sockets.length; i++) - sockets[i].close(close); - }); -} - let waiting = 2; function close() { if (--waiting === 0) cluster.worker.disconnect(); } -for (let i = 0; i < 2; i++) - dgram.createSocket({ type: 'udp4', reuseAddr: true }).bind(common.PORT, next); +const options = { type: 'udp4', reuseAddr: true }; +const socket1 = dgram.createSocket(options); +const socket2 = dgram.createSocket(options); + +socket1.bind(0, () => { + socket2.bind(socket1.address().port, () => { + // Work around health check issue + process.nextTick(() => { + socket1.close(close); + socket2.close(close); + }); + }) +});

I will make the changes, thanks.

Replaced common.PORT with zero in the following test. test-cluster-dgram-reuse.js Refs: #12376

arturgvieira-zz · 2017-05-12T10:58:25Z

@lpinca All done, I made the edits.

lpinca · 2017-05-12T11:02:40Z

CI 3: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-pull-request/8041/

lpinca · 2017-05-19T06:35:20Z

@nodejs/collaborators anyone else want to sign-off on this?

mcollina

LGTM

refack · 2017-05-19T11:48:07Z

Just for cross reference #13100

lpinca · 2017-05-19T13:46:00Z

Landed in 6b1819c.

Remove common.PORT from test-cluster-dgram-reuse to eliminate possibility that a dynamic port used in another test will collide with common.PORT. PR-URL: #12901 Ref: #12376 Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Matteo Collina <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Refael Ackermann <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Daijiro Wachi <[email protected]>

Remove common.PORT from test-cluster-dgram-reuse to eliminate possibility that a dynamic port used in another test will collide with common.PORT. PR-URL: nodejs#12901 Ref: nodejs#12376 Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Matteo Collina <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Refael Ackermann <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Daijiro Wachi <[email protected]>

Remove common.PORT from test-cluster-dgram-reuse to eliminate possibility that a dynamic port used in another test will collide with common.PORT. PR-URL: #12901 Ref: #12376 Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Matteo Collina <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Refael Ackermann <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Daijiro Wachi <[email protected]>

nodejs-github-bot added the test Issues and PRs related to the tests. label May 8, 2017

arturgvieira-zz commented May 8, 2017

View reviewed changes

Trott reviewed May 8, 2017

View reviewed changes

Trott previously requested changes May 8, 2017

View reviewed changes

arturgvieira-zz changed the title ~~test: remove common.PORT or move test to sequential~~ test: replace common.PORT with zero May 9, 2017

lpinca approved these changes May 9, 2017

View reviewed changes

arturgvieira-zz changed the title ~~test: replace common.PORT with zero~~ test: replace port in cluster dgram reuse test May 10, 2017

lpinca requested changes May 12, 2017

View reviewed changes

test: replace port in cluster dgram reuse test

1acea69

Replaced common.PORT with zero in the following test. test-cluster-dgram-reuse.js Refs: #12376

lpinca approved these changes May 12, 2017

View reviewed changes

mcollina approved these changes May 19, 2017

View reviewed changes

mscdex added cluster Issues and PRs related to the cluster subsystem. dgram Issues and PRs related to the dgram subsystem / UDP. labels May 19, 2017

refack approved these changes May 19, 2017

View reviewed changes

cjihrig approved these changes May 19, 2017

View reviewed changes

watilde approved these changes May 19, 2017

View reviewed changes

lpinca closed this May 19, 2017

lpinca mentioned this pull request May 19, 2017

test: use dynamic port in test-cluster-dgram-reuse #12426

Closed

2 tasks

Trott mentioned this pull request May 19, 2017

Remove common.PORT usage from parallel tests #12376

Closed

64 tasks

Trott mentioned this pull request May 20, 2017

test changing common.PORT to use 0 within the test-cluster-dgram.reus… #12932

Closed

1 task

jasnell mentioned this pull request May 28, 2017

8.0.0 Release Proposal #12220

Closed

gibfahn mentioned this pull request Jun 15, 2017

Auditing for 6.11.1 nodejs/Release#230

Closed

3 tasks

MylesBorins added the land-on-v6.x label Jul 17, 2017

MylesBorins mentioned this pull request Jul 18, 2017

v6.11.2 proposal #14356

Merged

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

test: replace port in cluster dgram reuse test #12901

test: replace port in cluster dgram reuse test #12901

arturgvieira-zz commented May 8, 2017 •

edited

Loading

watilde commented May 8, 2017

arturgvieira-zz May 8, 2017 •

edited

Loading

Trott May 8, 2017

Trott May 8, 2017

Trott May 8, 2017

Trott May 8, 2017

Trott May 8, 2017

Trott left a comment

arturgvieira-zz commented May 8, 2017 •

edited

Loading

Trott commented May 8, 2017

arturgvieira-zz commented May 8, 2017 •

edited

Loading

Trott commented May 8, 2017

Trott commented May 8, 2017

arturgvieira-zz commented May 8, 2017

arturgvieira-zz commented May 9, 2017 •

edited

Loading

lpinca commented May 9, 2017

lpinca May 12, 2017

arturgvieira-zz May 12, 2017

arturgvieira-zz commented May 12, 2017 •

edited

Loading

lpinca commented May 12, 2017

lpinca commented May 19, 2017

mcollina left a comment

refack commented May 19, 2017 •

edited

Loading

lpinca commented May 19, 2017

test: replace port in cluster dgram reuse test #12901

test: replace port in cluster dgram reuse test #12901

Conversation

arturgvieira-zz commented May 8, 2017 • edited Loading

Checklist

Affected core subsystem(s)

watilde commented May 8, 2017

arturgvieira-zz May 8, 2017 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Trott May 8, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Trott May 8, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Trott May 8, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Trott May 8, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Trott May 8, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Trott left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

arturgvieira-zz commented May 8, 2017 • edited Loading

Trott commented May 8, 2017

arturgvieira-zz commented May 8, 2017 • edited Loading

Trott commented May 8, 2017

Trott commented May 8, 2017

arturgvieira-zz commented May 8, 2017

arturgvieira-zz commented May 9, 2017 • edited Loading

lpinca commented May 9, 2017

lpinca May 12, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

arturgvieira-zz May 12, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

arturgvieira-zz commented May 12, 2017 • edited Loading

lpinca commented May 12, 2017

lpinca commented May 19, 2017

mcollina left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

refack commented May 19, 2017 • edited Loading

lpinca commented May 19, 2017

arturgvieira-zz commented May 8, 2017 •

edited

Loading

arturgvieira-zz May 8, 2017 •

edited

Loading

arturgvieira-zz commented May 8, 2017 •

edited

Loading

arturgvieira-zz commented May 8, 2017 •

edited

Loading

arturgvieira-zz commented May 9, 2017 •

edited

Loading

arturgvieira-zz commented May 12, 2017 •

edited

Loading

refack commented May 19, 2017 •

edited

Loading