> On Nov. 22, 2016, 2:44 p.m., haosdent huang wrote: > > src/tests/utils.cpp, lines 96-97 > > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/53949/diff/3/?file=1568083#file1568083line96> > > > > Should we have a maximum failure limit here? > > > > Another way to get a free port is to bind the socket to `0` and get a > > random port. Then close the socket and return that port to the caller.
I like the suggestion of binding to port `0` as this allows us to avoid calling ourself recursively. Adjusted code accordingly. - Benjamin ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/53949/#review156567 ----------------------------------------------------------- On Nov. 22, 2016, 4:49 p.m., Benjamin Bannier wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/53949/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated Nov. 22, 2016, 4:49 p.m.) > > > Review request for mesos, Alexander Rukletsov and haosdent huang. > > > Bugs: MESOS-6618 > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-6618 > > > Repository: mesos > > > Description > ------- > > Added test helper to obtain unused port. > > > Diffs > ----- > > src/tests/utils.hpp 140ebaaae43b03568ec49891635f0660cdfb4c85 > src/tests/utils.cpp eb36616f68d81d33d4bd04a7f23295e8c7558fc8 > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/53949/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > Tested as part of https://reviews.apache.org/r/53950/. > > > Thanks, > > Benjamin Bannier > >
