> On Feb. 10, 2016, 1:54 a.m., haosdent huang wrote:
> > src/linux/perf.cpp, line 471
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/43358/diff/3/?file=1238429#file1238429line471>
> >
> >     How about move `<not supported>` and `<not counted>` out in a const 
> > variable? So that avoid we write these strings again and agiain.

+1, will do (:


> On Feb. 10, 2016, 1:54 a.m., haosdent huang wrote:
> > src/linux/perf.cpp, line 493
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/43358/diff/3/?file=1238429#file1238429line493>
> >
> >     should be better use `0u` here? Refer to bernd's patch 
> > https://reviews.apache.org/r/43359/diff/1#index_header to fix compile error 
> > in gcc 5.2.

True. What about the line 479? We also should use `0.0` instead of `0` for 
double assignment.


- Bartek


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/43358/#review118546
-----------------------------------------------------------


On Feb. 9, 2016, 12:54 p.m., Bartek Plotka wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/43358/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Feb. 9, 2016, 12:54 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos, Ben Mahler, Chi Zhang, Ian Downes, Niklas Nielsen, 
> Paul Brett, Szymon Konefal, and Cong Wang.
> 
> 
> Bugs: MESOS-4595
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-4595
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> Added dynamic map `extra_events` for all additional perf events which are not 
> specified explicitly `PerfStatistics`
> TODO in next PRs: Add test and extend description for `--perf_events=` option 
> in Mesos flags.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   include/mesos/mesos.proto 194750e92020753e60154083a47bdc3398d31466 
>   src/linux/perf.cpp 1c113a2b3f57877e132bbd65e01fb2f045132128 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/43358/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> make check
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Bartek Plotka
> 
>

Reply via email to