Author xtreak
Recipients serhiy.storchaka, vstinner, xtreak
Date 2019-05-17.11:36:30
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <>
My analysis was that close was called on fakesocket which is internally closed when it's counter resets to zero and the destructor was trying to flush on a closed object during destructor call.

Comment from

The ValueError warnings in test_urllib noted in msg340059  feels like an issue with the test where FakeSocket calls close by itself once it's internal io_refs counter is 0 and during destructor again close is called on an already closed object causing the ValueError.

* The test uses fakehttp() creating FakeSocket starting with io_refs as 1 [1]
* During the test in urlopen, sock.makefile() (io_refs += 1) is called increasing the io_refs to be 2.
* HTTPConnection.close calls sock.close (fakesocket.close) [3] calling io_refs -= 1 and to fakesocket.io_ref to be 1.
* This test uses raises status 302 with http_error_302 which calls self.redirect_internal where self.close is again called causing fp.io_refs == 0 and subsequently calling io.BytesIO.close(self) to close the object. [4]
* During the end of the test destructor is called on the above closed fakesocket object and trying to flush on a closed object causes the ValueError warnings .

Maybe a check could be added during flush to make sure the object is not closed by testing for self.closed but I am not sure if closed attribute is guaranteed to be present. Removing the manual call to close in fakesocket could help since the destructor should be taking care of it and I could see no test failures or warnings removing the close as io_refs gets to 0.

Date User Action Args
2019-05-17 11:36:30xtreaksetrecipients: + xtreak, vstinner, serhiy.storchaka
2019-05-17 11:36:30xtreaksetmessageid: <>
2019-05-17 11:36:30xtreaklinkissue36918 messages
2019-05-17 11:36:30xtreakcreate