On 3/15/06, Joe Orton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Returning two separate descriptors should be valid behaviour, the test
> just needs to be adjusted to handle that case; it'll still catch the bug
> in the select() backend. Can you try this patch?
Tried on FreeBSD:
> Index: testpoll.c
> ===================================================================
> --- testpoll.c (revision 385518)
> +++ testpoll.c (working copy)
> @@ -309,10 +309,25 @@
>
> rv = apr_pollset_poll(pollset, 0, &lrv, &descs);
> ABTS_INT_EQUAL(tc, 0, APR_STATUS_IS_TIMEUP(rv));
> - ABTS_INT_EQUAL(tc, 1, lrv);
> - ABTS_PTR_EQUAL(tc, s[0], descs[0].desc.s);
> - ABTS_INT_EQUAL(tc, APR_POLLIN | APR_POLLOUT, descs[0].rtnevents);
> - ABTS_PTR_EQUAL(tc, s[0], descs[0].client_data);
> + if (lrv == 1) {
> + ABTS_PTR_EQUAL(tc, s[0], descs[0].desc.s);
> + ABTS_INT_EQUAL(tc, APR_POLLIN | APR_POLLOUT, descs[0].rtnevents);
> + ABTS_PTR_EQUAL(tc, s[0], descs[0].client_data);
> + }
> + else if (lrv == 2) {
> + ABTS_PTR_EQUAL(tc, s[0], descs[0].desc.s);
> + ABTS_PTR_EQUAL(tc, s[0], descs[0].client_data);
> + ABTS_PTR_EQUAL(tc, s[0], descs[1].desc.s);
> + ABTS_PTR_EQUAL(tc, s[0], descs[1].client_data);
> + ABTS_ASSERT(tc, "returned events incorrect",
> + ((descs[0].rtnevents | descs[1].rtnevents)
> + == (APR_POLLIN | APR_POLLOUT))
> + && descs[0].rtnevents != descs[1].rtnevents);
This fails because both rtnevents are actually APR_POLLIN | APR_POLLOUT.
> + }
> + else {
> + ABTS_ASSERT(tc, "either one or two events returned",
> + lrv == 1 || lrv == 2);
> + }
>
> recv_msg(s, 0, p, tc);
>
If we get past that point, we later fail because at the line:
ABTS_INT_EQUAL(tc, APR_POLLOUT, descs[0].rtnevents);
The rtnevents is again APR_POLLIN | APR_POLLOUT. Not clear why that's
the case, but there we have it...
-garrett
