> On 九月 20, 2015, 6:46 p.m., Vinod Kone wrote: > > src/master/http.cpp, line 486 > > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/38514/diff/2/?file=1077306#file1077306line486> > > > > this method should be called suppress too. > > > > > > to avoid conflict with the suppress marco, can you try putting that > > macro inside a "signals" namespace? > > Guangya Liu wrote: > Vinod, I was planning to fix this in > https://reviews.apache.org/r/38519/diff/1#1 , but the following code diff > still does not work after apply to https://reviews.apache.org/r/38519 > > diff --git > a/3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/os/signals.hpp > b/3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/os/signals.hpp > index 7a79024..91076c0 100644 > --- a/3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/os/signals.hpp > +++ b/3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/os/signals.hpp > @@ -23,10 +23,12 @@ > #include <stout/os/posix/signals.hpp> > #endif // __WINDOWS__ > > +namespace signals { > > #define suppress(signal) \ > if (os::signals::internal::Suppressor suppressor ## signal = \ > os::signals::internal::Suppressor(signal)) > > +} // namespace signals { > > #endif // __STOUT_OS_SIGNALS_HPP__ > diff --git > a/3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/tests/os/signals_tests.cpp > b/3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/tests/os/signals_tests.cpp > index de86232..b1d11c3 100644 > --- a/3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/tests/os/signals_tests.cpp > +++ b/3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/tests/os/signals_tests.cpp > @@ -40,7 +40,7 @@ TEST_F(OsSignalsTest, Suppress) > const string data = "hello"; > > // Let's make sure we can suppress SIGPIPE! > - suppress(SIGPIPE) { > + signals::suppress(SIGPIPE) { > // Writing to a pipe that has been closed generates SIGPIPE. > ASSERT_EQ(-1, write(pipes[1], data.c_str(), data.length())); > > I was continually getting error of the following, any suggestions? Thanks. > > In file included from > ../../3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/os/posix/sendfile.hpp:28:0, > from > ../../3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/os/sendfile.hpp:23, > from > ../../3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/os.hpp:84, > from > ../../3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/posix/net.hpp:39, > from > ../../3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/net.hpp:59, > from > ../../3rdparty/libprocess/include/process/address.hpp:31, > from > ../../3rdparty/libprocess/include/process/pid.hpp:26, > from > ../../3rdparty/libprocess/include/process/latch.hpp:20, > from > ../../3rdparty/libprocess/include/process/future.hpp:33, > from ../../include/mesos/authorizer/authorizer.hpp:28, > from ../../src/local/local.cpp:26: > > ../../3rdparty/libprocess/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/os/signals.hpp:29:3: > error: expected unqualified-id before 'if' > if (os::signals::internal::Suppressor suppressor ## signal = \ > ^ > ../../src/master/master.hpp:832:8: note: in expansion of macro 'suppress' > void suppress(Framework* framework); > ^ > > Vinod Kone wrote: > try putting "()" around the suppress function in master.cpp to avoid > master expansion. > > alternatively, the 'suppress' macro can be renamed to 'block'. cc @bmahler > > Guangya Liu wrote: > The issue was not addressed in https://reviews.apache.org/r/38544/
The issue was now addressed in https://reviews.apache.org/r/38544/ - Guangya ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/38514/#review99710 ----------------------------------------------------------- On 九月 21, 2015, 6:05 a.m., Guangya Liu wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/38514/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated 九月 21, 2015, 6:05 a.m.) > > > Review request for mesos and Vinod Kone. > > > Bugs: MESOS-3037 > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-3037 > > > Repository: mesos > > > Description > ------- > > A comment from Vinod: After some discussion with other committers, > most of them felt SUPPRESS is better than QUIESCE. > > > Diffs > ----- > > include/mesos/scheduler/scheduler.proto > 89ddc10d5873cdf09bf5084c4869bc7c29933eab > include/mesos/v1/scheduler/scheduler.proto > bc19b8dfb2ded26a30a28e7370f06816e0fb1999 > src/master/http.cpp 607d8e1b6efe0115b09be0a0c73edbd8e64d8415 > src/master/master.cpp 6c0db210747c7d88179556abaade65743bd8cb3a > src/master/validation.cpp 0f3fc1a20b065a88712cceabab0ceffaec598533 > src/sched/sched.cpp 84c2edb2c660f976fd57d1407dd2e9d5376500aa > src/tests/scheduler_tests.cpp 0f892f9d423f0bc72cdab22452e0ad7965dda444 > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/38514/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > Platform: Ubuntu:14.04 > make > make check > > > Thanks, > > Guangya Liu > >
