Hi Artem,
Please review the new webrev at:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jjiang/8186057/webrev.07/
Please see my comments below.
One question about Compatibility.caseStatus(). What's the case
when you expect a timeout and no client output? Should it always
result to a test case failure?
I'm not sure understanding your question. Did you mean server or
client timeout?
I think client should output something.
My questing is - should timeout be always considered as a failure?
Why don't you just check if server or client result is FAIL?
if (clientStatus == FAIL || serverStatus == FAIL) {
return FAIL;
}
return PASS;
Some cases are negative cases, their status should be EXPECTED_FAIL.
That's fine, I got that.
A server or client timeout would lead to the case to fail, if the
failure is not expected.
If a server starts normally, but client doesn't start due to a
negative case, the server should get timeout. But this failure is
expected.
If a server starts normally, and client get a unexpected timeout,
this failure would make the case to fail.
This logic looks unnecessary complex to me. The more complex it is,
the more likely we get a bug there. I think TIMEOUT status is not
necessary here. If a failure is expected on one side, the other side
should fail as well (no matter if it's a timeout or an exception).
If I were you, I would simplify this method like this
if (client == EXPECTED_FAIL && server == EXPECTED_FAIL) {
return EXPECTED_FAIL;
}
if (client == PASS && server == PASS) {
return PASS;
}
return FAIL;
If I am not missing something, the pseudo-code above looks better and
simpler.
1. This test designs 5 status:
SUCCESS, UNEXPECTED_SUCCESS, FAIL, EXPECTED_FAIL and TIMEOUT
The main purpose is making the test report more clear.
A case fails that may be due to:
Unexpected failure;
No failure, but it is expected to get some failure;
Timeout, although it is also not expected, this failure may have nothing
to do with SSL/TLS exceptions, like SSLHandshakeException.
The test just wants to distinguish these different situations. I assume
users generally just look through the report table, but not the detail logs.
2. This test really treats TIMEOUT as failure. Server and/or client
timout, it should result in the case gets FAIL or EXPECTED_FAIL.
3. Your above code snippet doesn't cover all possible result status.
For example, client == PASS && server == PASS, but this case may be
expected to get some failure. The status should be UNEXPECTED_SUCCESS in
my design.
Again, some more status are used to make the report table could give
more information before investigating details.
4. The updated webrev havs merged two if-clauses to simplify the method
Compatibility.caseStatus() a bit.
Best regards,
John Jiang
