On Mon, Nov 19, 2018 at 11:00:38AM -0600, Eric Blake wrote: > On 11/19/18 4:37 AM, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > > > > Actually, I tracked this message down to using socat (which actually > > > connects and then abruptly exits) when probing whether the socket is up > > > and > > > listening. That is, the message is being produced as a side effect of > > > nbd_server_wait_for_tcp_socket rather than during the actual $QEMU_IMG > > > command we are interested in testing. > > > > > This is the first use of socat in iotests. Might not be the most > > > > portable, but I don't know if I have better ideas. > > > > nbdkit.git/tests/test-ip.sh greps the output of 'ss -ltn' to locate free > > > > ports, but I don't know if ss is any better than socat. > > > > > > So, I'm planning to squash this in, to use ss instead of socat, as > > > follows: > > > > Personally I prefer socat since it is more portable, per my previous > > message. > > socat is indeed probably more portable, but since tests 233 uses > '_supported_os Linux', ss availability isn't a problem until a future user > ports this test to non-Linux. I'd like to patch qemu-nbd to NOT warn about > a user that connects but does not consume data (the socat case, as well as > port probes), but as that patch does not exist yet and -rc2 is getting > close, I'll go ahead and send the pull request with ss instead of socat.
Yes, that's ok with me. Regards, Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|