================
@@ -185,6 +185,8 @@ def setUpServerLogging(self, is_llgs):
]
def get_next_port(self):
+ if available_ports := self.getPlatformAvailablePorts():
+ return int(random.choice(available_ports))
----------------
dlav-sc wrote:
I haven't encountered this issue.
LLDB testsuite starts `lldb-server` in `gdbserver` mode before running each
LLGS test. The `get_next_port` function is used to select a port to listen by
`lldb-server`. At the end of the test, the testsuite kills `lldb-server`,
making the port available again. If the testsuite is unable to start
`lldb-server` on the chosen port, it waits for a second or so, selects another
port using `get_next_port`, and tries to run `lldb-server` again. This can take
several attempts, but it almost always works on the first try.
Currently, I pass 10 ports in this option, which is more than enough to
successfully pass all LLGS tests.
To remove the randomization, we could introduce a counter and choose ports in
ascending or descending order by modulo. However, I don't think this would
significantly change anything.
The initial issue was that `get_next_port` selected a port from a pool of not
non forwarded ports, so there was no chance to get a suitable port. Now we can
choose a busy port, but it's not a big problem in fact.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/112555
_______________________________________________
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
