Bug 1388422

Summary: rlWaitForSocket --close should wait for socket to actually close
Product: [Fedora] Fedora Reporter: Martin Frodl <mfrodl>
Component: beakerlibAssignee: Dalibor Pospíšil <dapospis>
Status: CLOSED EOL QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity: unspecified Docs Contact:
Priority: low    
Version: 27CC: azelinka, dapospis, fsumsal, hkario, mkyral, muller
Target Milestone: ---Keywords: Patch
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: Unspecified   
OS: Unspecified   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2018-11-30 19:29:20 UTC Type: Bug
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Bug Depends On: 1416014, 1496120    
Bug Blocks:    
Attachments:
Description Flags
Proposed patch none

Description Martin Frodl 2016-10-25 10:25:43 UTC
Created attachment 1213824 [details]
Proposed patch

Description of problem:

Currently, rlWaitSocket --close only waits for the socket to stop listening, not to actually close. Sometimes a socket can be in a TIME_WAIT state (not listening but still open) for a relatively long time (60 seconds).

This means that even when the rlWaitSocket --close command finishes, there is no guarantee that the port will be available to other processes. It would make more sense to wait until the socket really closes.

Attached is my proposed patch.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
beakerlib-1.11-2.fc24.noarch

Comment 1 Dalibor Pospíšil 2016-10-25 10:31:21 UTC
This makes sense, thanks for the patch.

Comment 3 Hubert Kario 2017-01-23 13:17:34 UTC
I think the exclude of TIME_WAIT should be the default for --close.

Majority of servers do start with SO_REUSEADDR option passed to the socket, so it is not necessary to wait for the socket to be completely free before starting them.

For the minority that don't use it, I think the wait for TIME_WAIT should be specified by option, not the default - the TIME_WAIT state lasts for a long time, unnecessarily delaying the execution of many test cases.

Comment 4 Dalibor Pospíšil 2017-01-23 15:54:49 UTC
I decided not to block the release by this issue. Please file/clone new bug and ideally include particular solution you would like to see. I do not know this problematic well so basically I need detailed advice here.

Comment 5 Stanislav Zidek 2017-01-24 11:17:35 UTC
Follow up bug: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1416014

Comment 6 Dalibor Pospíšil 2017-01-24 11:25:41 UTC
Due to complains coming I have unpushed the package from stable. I will revert this change and postpone the fix to the next release.

Comment 7 Fedora End Of Life 2017-07-25 23:36:37 UTC
This message is a reminder that Fedora 24 is nearing its end of life.
Approximately 2 (two) weeks from now Fedora will stop maintaining
and issuing updates for Fedora 24. It is Fedora's policy to close all
bug reports from releases that are no longer maintained. At that time
this bug will be closed as EOL if it remains open with a Fedora  'version'
of '24'.

Package Maintainer: If you wish for this bug to remain open because you
plan to fix it in a currently maintained version, simply change the 'version'
to a later Fedora version.

Thank you for reporting this issue and we are sorry that we were not
able to fix it before Fedora 24 is end of life. If you would still like
to see this bug fixed and are able to reproduce it against a later version
of Fedora, you are encouraged  change the 'version' to a later Fedora
version prior this bug is closed as described in the policy above.

Although we aim to fix as many bugs as possible during every release's
lifetime, sometimes those efforts are overtaken by events. Often a
more recent Fedora release includes newer upstream software that fixes
bugs or makes them obsolete.

Comment 8 Jan Kurik 2017-08-15 08:40:22 UTC
This bug appears to have been reported against 'rawhide' during the Fedora 27 development cycle.
Changing version to '27'.

Comment 9 Ben Cotton 2018-11-27 17:18:24 UTC
This message is a reminder that Fedora 27 is nearing its end of life.
On 2018-Nov-30  Fedora will stop maintaining and issuing updates for
Fedora 27. It is Fedora's policy to close all bug reports from releases
that are no longer maintained. At that time this bug will be closed as
EOL if it remains open with a Fedora  'version' of '27'.

Package Maintainer: If you wish for this bug to remain open because you
plan to fix it in a currently maintained version, simply change the 'version' 
to a later Fedora version.

Thank you for reporting this issue and we are sorry that we were not 
able to fix it before Fedora 27 is end of life. If you would still like 
to see this bug fixed and are able to reproduce it against a later version 
of Fedora, you are encouraged  change the 'version' to a later Fedora 
version prior this bug is closed as described in the policy above.

Although we aim to fix as many bugs as possible during every release's 
lifetime, sometimes those efforts are overtaken by events. Often a 
more recent Fedora release includes newer upstream software that fixes 
bugs or makes them obsolete.

Comment 10 Ben Cotton 2018-11-30 19:29:20 UTC
Fedora 27 changed to end-of-life (EOL) status on 2018-11-30. Fedora 27 is
no longer maintained, which means that it will not receive any further
security or bug fix updates. As a result we are closing this bug.

If you can reproduce this bug against a currently maintained version of
Fedora please feel free to reopen this bug against that version. If you
are unable to reopen this bug, please file a new report against the
current release. If you experience problems, please add a comment to this
bug.

Thank you for reporting this bug and we are sorry it could not be fixed.