The patch is also in Issue number 27584 along with a README file that explains how to setup the environment for tests.

Looks like your branch contains additional commits and unfortunately it makes code review harder. Could you rebase your branch against current master? You might find https://devguide.python.org/gitbootcamp/#syncing-with-upstream helpful.

@berkerpeksag

So you want me to sync my github branch bpo-27584 with the upstream cpython branch? Is that correct? I'm just a little unclear as to what you are asking.

Cathy

@berkerpeksag

Or do you want me to rebase both my master ( fork of upstream ) and my bpo-27584 branch?

Thanks again

So you want me to sync my github branch bpo-27584 with the upstream cpython branch? Is that correct?

Correct. Your branch bpo-27584 now contains 34 commits and 30 of them are unrelated to the vSockets feature as you can see at https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/2489/files (the reason is probably this merge commit)

@berkerpeksag

Sorry I seem to have an issue.
git fetch upstream
git rebase upstream/master

Python Dev~/caavery.github/cpython# git push origin bpo-27584
To git@github.com:caavery/cpython.git
! [rejected] bpo-27584 -> bpo-27584 (non-fast-forward)
error: failed to push some refs to 'git@github.com:caavery/cpython.git'
hint: Updates were rejected because the tip of your current branch is behind
hint: its remote counterpart. Merge the remote changes (e.g. 'git pull')
hint: before pushing again.
hint: See the 'Note about fast-forwards' in 'git push --help' for details.

@berkerpeksag

Sorry this is my first time with github and working with remote branches. I just forced the push into my branch bpo-27584. My branch says that 'This branch is 4 commits ahead of python:master. ' which is what I think you wanted.

My branch says that 'This branch is 4 commits ahead of python:master. ' which is what I think you wanted.

Looks great, thanks! I will try to take another look at the patch while we wait for Kushal's review.

@kushaldas

Is there anything else I should be doing? The patches have passed all tests so far and I have addressed all the issues raised.

Thanks,

Cathy

A Python core developer, tiran, has requested some changes be
made to your pull request before we can consider merging it. If you
could please address their requests along with any other requests in
other reviews from core developers that would be appreciated.

Once you have made the requested changes, please leave a comment
on this pull request containing the phrase I didn't expect the Spanish Inquisition!
I will then notify tiran along with any other core developers
who have left a review that you're ready for them to take another look
at this pull request.

I didn't expect the Spanish Inquisition!

Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition!

@kushaldas, @tiran: please review the changes made to this pull request.

A Python core developer has requested some changes be made to your pull request before we can consider merging it. If you could please address their requests along with any other requests in other reviews from core developers that would be appreciated.

Once you have made the requested changes, please leave a comment on this pull request containing the phrase I didn't expect the Spanish Inquisition!. I will then notify any core developers who have left a review that you're ready for them to take another look at this pull request.

OK there seems to be a problem with the build now. I'll address it next week. Thanks.

You were right, either #undef AF_VSOCK is required or you have to replace all #ifdef AF_VSOCK with #ifdef HAVE_LINUX_VM_SOCKETS_H. The address family and the VM socket struct are defined in different header files. AF_VSOCK can be present w/o linux/vm_sockets.h.

I didn't expect the Spanish Inquisition!

Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition!

@kushaldas, @tiran: please review the changes made to this pull request.

FYI I wrote PR gh-119463 to skip the tests if get_cid() returns VMADDR_CID_ANY. Apparently, the Linux kernel 6.9 changed /dev/vsock device.