----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/10746/#review19639 -----------------------------------------------------------
src/slave/cgroups_isolator.hpp <https://reviews.apache.org/r/10746/#comment40549> yay! src/slave/cgroups_isolator.cpp <https://reviews.apache.org/r/10746/#comment40551> i think we were indenting .onAny etc with 2 spaces not 4. also, each argument should be on a different line. src/slave/cgroups_isolator.cpp <https://reviews.apache.org/r/10746/#comment40552> formatting. src/slave/cgroups_isolator.cpp <https://reviews.apache.org/r/10746/#comment40554> What if the future is discarded? src/slave/process_isolator.cpp <https://reviews.apache.org/r/10746/#comment40556> reorder src/slave/process_isolator.cpp <https://reviews.apache.org/r/10746/#comment40558> formatting src/slave/process_isolator.cpp <https://reviews.apache.org/r/10746/#comment40559> formatting src/slave/process_isolator.cpp <https://reviews.apache.org/r/10746/#comment40560> ditto, check for discarded too src/slave/reaper.hpp <https://reviews.apache.org/r/10746/#comment40561> Add a comment saying this is a forward declaration. src/slave/reaper.hpp <https://reviews.apache.org/r/10746/#comment40562> You do send a notification, it's a failed future, correct? src/slave/reaper.hpp <https://reviews.apache.org/r/10746/#comment40563> For me 'statuses' really doesn't capture what this map is about. May be 'listeners' or 'receivers'? Also, why not MultiHashmap? src/slave/reaper.cpp <https://reviews.apache.org/r/10746/#comment40565> To be sure, we only add a pid to 'statuses' map if it has permissions correct? So, we better have permission at this point? src/slave/reaper.cpp <https://reviews.apache.org/r/10746/#comment40566> Can you expand on your comment here? src/slave/reaper.cpp <https://reviews.apache.org/r/10746/#comment40568> Considering you always have the permission (because you reject non-permissible ones in monitor) is this necessary? Alternatively, is it correct to reject listeners in monitor() if this could still give them result? src/tests/reaper_tests.cpp <https://reviews.apache.org/r/10746/#comment40570> s/processExited/status/ src/tests/reaper_tests.cpp <https://reviews.apache.org/r/10746/#comment40572> Ditto, a comment here that this is parent process. src/tests/reaper_tests.cpp <https://reviews.apache.org/r/10746/#comment40571> Can you add a comment here saying this is the child process. src/tests/reaper_tests.cpp <https://reviews.apache.org/r/10746/#comment40573> s/processExited/status src/tests/reaper_tests.cpp <https://reviews.apache.org/r/10746/#comment40574> instead of pulling this into a temp variable, just do processExited.get() (or status.get()) src/tests/reaper_tests.cpp <https://reviews.apache.org/r/10746/#comment40575> You mean that has exited before that pid was asked to monitor, correct? src/tests/reaper_tests.cpp <https://reviews.apache.org/r/10746/#comment40576> // In child process. src/tests/reaper_tests.cpp <https://reviews.apache.org/r/10746/#comment40577> // In parent process src/tests/reaper_tests.cpp <https://reviews.apache.org/r/10746/#comment40578> Can you expand the comment on why you do this? src/tests/reaper_tests.cpp <https://reviews.apache.org/r/10746/#comment40579> I think you should do an ASSERT on proc::alive(pid) src/tests/reaper_tests.cpp <https://reviews.apache.org/r/10746/#comment40580> s/grand/child/ ? src/tests/reaper_tests.cpp <https://reviews.apache.org/r/10746/#comment40581> s/processExited/status - Vinod Kone On April 24, 2013, 12:43 a.m., Jiang Yan Xu wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/10746/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated April 24, 2013, 12:43 a.m.) > > > Review request for mesos, Benjamin Hindman, Vinod Kone, and Ben Mahler. > > > Description > ------- > > See summary. > > - Previously the listener was notified when its child processes terminate > whether it register them or not. > > > Diffs > ----- > > src/slave/cgroups_isolator.hpp f8fabc4e1c3c303b35a76db96b4b2479bd7c8ff8 > src/slave/cgroups_isolator.cpp 8b79da50d8fb0c2c8716dd7d2c734b65c32f60b4 > src/slave/process_isolator.hpp 9875f4a6e8e109e31ad390fbd7a84d03ad747190 > src/slave/process_isolator.cpp 6e2af87d291d7c3448393c1ffa816f7020e2dff6 > src/slave/reaper.hpp 09844d8d47b143ee369e0c82b19d65a774df4a90 > src/slave/reaper.cpp bd3dcef07c370ad338b478755bf8f7ce6408e4a3 > src/tests/reaper_tests.cpp 0809c1ff17eb949beb1bdd922fdced022aa202f3 > src/tests/utils.hpp ffe637f2f03ff5ca020a4d2cb617be047aade034 > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/10746/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > make check. > > > Thanks, > > Jiang Yan Xu > >
