qpid-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Alan Conway (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Updated] (PROTON-1849) [c] server behaves incorrectly on duplicate link attach
Date Fri, 18 May 2018 13:04:00 GMT

     [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PROTON-1849?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]

Alan Conway updated PROTON-1849:
--------------------------------
    Summary: [c] server behaves incorrectly on duplicate link attach  (was: CLONE - [c] server
behaves incorrectly on duplicate link attach)

> [c] server behaves incorrectly on duplicate link attach
> -------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: PROTON-1849
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PROTON-1849
>             Project: Qpid Proton
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: proton-c
>    Affects Versions: proton-c-0.22.0
>            Reporter: Alan Conway
>            Assignee: Alan Conway
>            Priority: Minor
>
> There is a disabled test to reproduce this problem, see test_duplicate_link_client()
in
> [https://github.com/alanconway/qpid-proton/blob/master/c/tests/connection_driver.c#L498]
> pni_process does all pending link opens before all pending link closes, it does not respect
the order of individual open/close calls in the code. This doesn't cause a problem for distinct
links but if a link of the same name is opened/closed/reopened very quickly it can cause a
problem:
> For example if l1 and l2 are both pn_links with name "x" then this sequence:
> {code:java}
> open(l1); close(l1); open(l2){code}
> generates this illegal protocol sequence:
> {code:java}
> attach("x"); attach("x"); detach(0) // 0 is the handle assigned to "x"{code}
> instead of the intended legal sequence:
> {code:java}
> attach("x"); detach(0); attach("x") // detach(0) detaches the first "x" so second "x"
is allowed{code}
> NOTE: This applies to all endpoints, not just links but since connections and sessions
don't have client-assignable names that can clash, the problem only shows up for links and
only if the detach/attach for the same name is processed in the same transport batch. This
is unlikely in practice and was discovered only because of investigation of PROTON-1832.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@qpid.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@qpid.apache.org


Mime
View raw message