Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Fix #969, socket accept using incorrect record #971

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Apr 28, 2021

Conversation

jphickey
Copy link
Contributor

Describe the contribution
This improves the network-api-test to do multiple connections, re-using the same acceptor socket between them.

As reported in #969, the OS_SocketAccept call was using the incorrect token, using the server/acceptor socket when it should have used the connection socket.

The bug overwrote data in the acceptor socket, but it would only cause an issue when the user attempted to use the server socket to accept a second connection, but the tests only performed a single connection.

With the improvement to network-api-test to run multiple connections, it now reveals the bug in the test. Without the fix, the test failed on the second connection. With the fix to OS_SocketAccept to use the correct token, the test passes fine again.

Fixes #969

Testing performed
Build and sanity check CFE, run all unit tests (particularly network-api-test).

Expected behavior changes
OS_SocketAccept() does not clobber the server socket, allows it to be re-used for additional connection(s) as intended.

System(s) tested on
Ubuntu 20.04

Contributor Info - All information REQUIRED for consideration of pull request
Joseph Hickey, Vantage Systems, Inc.

@jphickey jphickey added CCB:FastTrack CCB:Ready Pull request is ready for discussion at the Configuration Control Board (CCB) labels Apr 27, 2021
The OS_SocketAccept call was using the incorrect token, using
the server/acceptor socket when it should have used the connection
socket.

The bug overwrote data in the acceptor socket, but it would only cause
an issue when the user attempted to use the server socket to accept
a second connection, but the tests only performed a single connection.

This also improves the network-api-test to do multiple connections,
re-using the same acceptor socket between them.
@jphickey
Copy link
Contributor Author

Re-Pushed to fix formatting.....

@skliper
Copy link
Contributor

skliper commented Apr 27, 2021

Ping @excaliburtb

The stream test was sending an 8-bit count pattern to validate
the connection, but was not using the provided API to do so.

This provides the exact same test but uses the provided API
from UtAssert to implement it, rather than duplicating the logic.

Notably, this also confirms that the tool functions work as
expected, since there were no other OSAL tests using this API.
@jphickey
Copy link
Contributor Author

Updated this PR, I added a second commit which changes the explicit test of the count pattern to utilize the provided UtMemFill and UtAssert_MemCmpCount APIs, respectively. No other tests were using this facility so this helps confirm that it works correctly.

@astrogeco
Copy link
Contributor

astrogeco commented Apr 28, 2021

Do we want approval from @excaliburtb before merge?

@astrogeco astrogeco changed the base branch from main to integration-candidate April 28, 2021 13:13
@astrogeco astrogeco merged commit bcb8050 into nasa:integration-candidate Apr 28, 2021
astrogeco added a commit to nasa/cFS that referenced this pull request Apr 28, 2021
nasa/osal#972, update documentation for read/write
nasa/osal#966, add "handler" feature to utassert stub API
nasa/osal#953, Adds local makefile and bundle/local unit test actions with coverage verification
nasa/osal#971, socket accept using incorrect record
@skliper
Copy link
Contributor

skliper commented Apr 28, 2021

Do we want approval from @excaliburtb before merge?

@astrogeco Explicit external approval not required. Feel free to merge.

@astrogeco astrogeco removed the CCB:Ready Pull request is ready for discussion at the Configuration Control Board (CCB) label Apr 28, 2021
astrogeco added a commit to nasa/cFS that referenced this pull request Apr 29, 2021
Combines:

nasa/cFE#1431
nasa/osal#975
nasa/sample_lib#61

Includes:

nasa/cFE#1379, memory pool pointer type
nasa/cFE#1289, ES child task functional test
nasa/cFE#1289, typo in macro name
nasa/cFE#1286, Remove broken BUILDDIR reference
nasa/cFE#1305, remove option for "osal_compatible"
nasa/cFE#1374, CFE_SUCCESS constant type
nasa/cFE#1316, Remove Unused Error Codes
nasa/cFE#1370, better warning about malformed startup line
nasa/cFE#1373, check status of call to `CFE_ES_CDS_CachePreload`
nasa/cFE#1384, update documentation for `CFE_ES_DeleteCDS`
nasa/cFE#1385, exception logic when app/task is not found
nasa/cFE#1372, error if alignment size not a power of two
nasa/cFE#1368, remove unneeded CFE_ES_SYSLOG_APPEND macro
nasa/cFE#1382, improve documentation for resourceID patterns
nasa/cFE#1371, assert `CFE_RESOURCEID_MAX` is a bitmask

nasa/osal#972, update documentation for read/write
nasa/osal#966, add "handler" feature to utassert stub API
nasa/osal#953, Adds local makefile and bundle/local unit test actions with coverage verification
nasa/osal#971, socket accept using incorrect record
nasa/osal#959, move async console option

nasa/sample_lib#60, replace direct ref to ArgPtr with macro
@jphickey jphickey deleted the fix-969-socket-accept branch April 29, 2021 13:14
@skliper skliper added this to the 6.0.0 milestone Sep 24, 2021
jphickey pushed a commit to jphickey/osal that referenced this pull request Aug 10, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Wrong token name used in accept call
3 participants