Open
Bug 903830
Opened 11 years ago
Updated 2 years ago
dom/network/tests/unit/test_tcpserversocket.js uses a hardcoded port
Categories
(Core :: DOM: Core & HTML, defect, P5)
Core
DOM: Core & HTML
Tracking
()
NEW
People
(Reporter: mihneadb, Unassigned)
Details
Attachments
(1 file)
582 bytes,
patch
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
This causes (intermittent) trouble when running the xpcshell tests in parallel. [self reminder] Must remove the run-sequentially annotation introduced in bug 898658 when this gets fixed.
Reporter | ||
Updated•11 years ago
|
Assignee: nobody → mihneadb
Reporter | ||
Comment 1•11 years ago
|
||
Removing this as a dep because I'm having a bit of trouble with the interface. Will just mark the test to run-sequentially for now in bug 887054. I see in the .idl file that the port parameter is an *unsigned* and that's not good since I have to pass in -1 to get a dynamic port (as the docstring actually suggests). Also, I tried accessing the .port attribute (it's in the .idl as well) and the test just hangs. Could use some help on this! :) Thanks
No longer blocks: 887064
Flags: needinfo?(dpreston)
Comment 2•11 years ago
|
||
Isn't port 0 the port to use to get a dynamic port, not -1? Can you point me to the docstring you are talking about? Using port 0 and then accessing the .port attribute should be the correct way to get this to run in parallel. I will put an entry on my todo list to look into why accessing the .port attribute hangs.
Flags: needinfo?(dpreston)
Reporter | ||
Comment 3•11 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Donovan Preston from comment #2) > Isn't port 0 the port to use to get a dynamic port, not -1? Can you point me > to the docstring you are talking about? > > Using port 0 and then accessing the .port attribute should be the correct > way to get this to run in parallel. I will put an entry on my todo list to > look into why accessing the .port attribute hangs. 0 is in BSD/kernel land, yes. However, [1] says -1. [1] http://dxr.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/source/dom/network/interfaces/nsIDOMTCPSocket.idl#l60
Comment 4•11 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Mihnea Dobrescu-Balaur (:mihneadb) from comment #3) > 0 is in BSD/kernel land, yes. However, [1] says -1. > > [1] > http://dxr.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/source/dom/network/interfaces/ > nsIDOMTCPSocket.idl#l60 Hmm, you're right. I'm not sure I like that, I think I would prefer it to be 0. But that's not really important, the important thing is to figure out why passing -1 and then accessing .port hangs. I'll try to take a look tomorrow.
Reporter | ||
Comment 5•11 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Donovan Preston from comment #4) > (In reply to Mihnea Dobrescu-Balaur (:mihneadb) from comment #3) > > 0 is in BSD/kernel land, yes. However, [1] says -1. > > > > [1] > > http://dxr.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/source/dom/network/interfaces/ > > nsIDOMTCPSocket.idl#l60 > > Hmm, you're right. I'm not sure I like that, I think I would prefer it to be > 0. But that's not really important, the important thing is to figure out why > passing -1 and then accessing .port hangs. I'll try to take a look tomorrow. That's great, thanks!
Reporter | ||
Updated•11 years ago
|
Assignee: mihneadb → nobody
Comment 6•11 years ago
|
||
Ok, I think I have a plan for fixing this. Testing now to see whether it will work.
Updated•11 years ago
|
Assignee: nobody → dpreston
Comment 7•11 years ago
|
||
Ok, so first of all, the docs are wrong. You actually pass 0 to have the OS choose a free port, and it actually works right now. However, there is another bug, which is that it is not possible to know the port that was chosen when in a child process. I believe the port can't be discovered by the child process synchronously, either, so there will have to be a new "onlistening" event or something like that which will indicate the port is now known to the child process.
Reporter | ||
Comment 8•11 years ago
|
||
If the child process shares code with the parent you can inject it from there. If it is too complicated you can just keep it as is (run-sequentially) and all will be fine.
Comment 9•11 years ago
|
||
Here's a bugfix for a typo which was preventing access to the localPort attribute.
Updated•9 years ago
|
Assignee: dpreston → nobody
Comment 10•6 years ago
|
||
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1472046 Move all DOM bugs that haven’t been updated in more than 3 years and has no one currently assigned to P5. If you have questions, please contact :mdaly.
Priority: -- → P5
Assignee | ||
Updated•5 years ago
|
Component: DOM → DOM: Core & HTML
Updated•2 years ago
|
Severity: normal → S3
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•