----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/38333/#review98863 -----------------------------------------------------------
Ship it! src/slave/containerizer/isolators/filesystem/linux.cpp (lines 721 - 723) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/38333/#comment155489> You are logging the sandbox as "working directory" and "sandbox" respectively for the two (w/ new rootfs and w/o) cases in `prepare()`, should we aim for symmetry here when in `cleanup()`? Or we can say `<< "Unmounting sandbox/work directory '" <<`? src/slave/containerizer/isolators/filesystem/linux.cpp (line 728) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/38333/#comment155491> Ditto about the name "sandbox" here. src/slave/containerizer/provisioners/appc/provisioner.cpp (lines 368 - 369) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/38333/#comment155494> Oh... I thought `root` was being copied but I guess the compilers says otherwise? src/slave/containerizer/provisioners/appc/provisioner.cpp (line 379) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/38333/#comment155495> Adjust the expected likelyhood a bit by s/likely/possible/? src/slave/containerizer/provisioners/appc/provisioner.cpp (line 380) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/38333/#comment155529> Expand to explain the reason for EBUSY? ``` EBUSY because of the race between cleaning up this container and new containers copying the host mount table ``` It's not immediately obvious without some comments. src/slave/containerizer/provisioners/backends/bind.cpp (line 169) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/38333/#comment155496> s/returns/return/. - Jiang Yan Xu On Sept. 12, 2015, 11:33 p.m., Jie Yu wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/38333/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated Sept. 12, 2015, 11:33 p.m.) > > > Review request for mesos, haosdent huang, Timothy Chen, Vinod Kone, and Jiang > Yan Xu. > > > Bugs: MESOS-3349 > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-3349 > > > Repository: mesos > > > Description > ------- > > Made container sandbox a shared mount to address MESOS-3349. > > See the discussion in https://reviews.apache.org/r/38329/ for more context. > > The idea is to mark container sandbox a shared mount (do a self bind mount > first) so that persistent volume mounts can be propagated. > > This is less invasive than marking '/' as a shared mount. > > One followup for this patch is to set the default filesystem isolator to > posix as the linux isolator will manipulate host mount table. > > We also need to address the TODO in `LinuxFilesystemIsolator::_recover` so > that tests do not leak mounts in the host mount table. > > > Diffs > ----- > > src/slave/containerizer/isolators/filesystem/linux.cpp > 0970b3d48b13d5e9d2e0160df5cf14a3dcd0acc9 > src/slave/containerizer/provisioners/appc/provisioner.cpp > cd29a00fa0db8af294c10bb7a2e0cb4252bd2993 > src/slave/containerizer/provisioners/backends/bind.cpp > 1cdae61786790dc6a475ae5f73c8cc92d2bbf739 > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/38333/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > sudo make check on Centos5 and Centos6 > > > Thanks, > > Jie Yu > >
