> On Sept. 6, 2017, 1 p.m., Qian Zhang wrote:
> > src/tests/containerizer/ports_isolator_tests.cpp
> > Lines 1051-1052 (patched)
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/62003/diff/1/?file=1808287#file1808287line1051>
> >
> > Can you please elaborate a bit about this? What do you mean for `the original
nested container status gets swallowed`?
When we are not using nested containers, we get a `REASON_CONTAINER_LIMITATION` status update
which comes directly from the isolator. However, when we use nested containers, we actually
get a `REASON_COMMAND_EXECUTOR_FAILED` reason; the task status that comes from the isolator
never goes anywhere.
- James
-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/62003/#review184660
-----------------------------------------------------------
On Aug. 30, 2017, 11:16 p.m., James Peach wrote:
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/62003/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
> (Updated Aug. 30, 2017, 11:16 p.m.)
>
>
> Review request for mesos, Qian Zhang and Jiang Yan Xu.
>
>
> Bugs: MESOS-7675
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-7675
>
>
> Repository: mesos
>
>
> Description
> -------
>
> Added `network/ports` isolator nested container tests using the v1
> TaskGroups API. This tests that rogue port usage by a nested task is
> detected both with and without agent recovery, and that a well-behaved
> task is preserved across agent recovery.
>
>
> Diffs
> -----
>
> src/tests/containerizer/ports_isolator_tests.cpp PRE-CREATION
>
>
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/62003/diff/1/
>
>
> Testing
> -------
>
> make check (Fedora 26)
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> James Peach
>
>
|