> On April 26, 2016, 8:27 a.m., Adam B wrote:
> > src/slave/http.cpp, line 360
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/46203/diff/13/?file=1359473#file1359473line360>
> >
> >     Should this perhaps be a `Shared<>`?

I don't think so. `Shared<>` is about shared ownership, but the closure 
shouldn't own `Slave*`, but only use it. If we'd want to make sure that `slave_ 
!= NULL` during the lifetime of the closure, we would have to use something 
like `std::weak_ptr`, managed by a shared pointer.
I'd argue that because the `Slave` instance routes its HTTP requests to an 
`Http` instance, `slave_ != NULL` during the lifetime of the `Http` instance. 
Hence it's safe to use the pointer to `Slave` in the closure.

Anyways, I'll change the closure to use `Flags` instead of `Slave*` as a 
parameter. The will be copied by value, object lifetime isn't a problem in that 
case.


> On April 26, 2016, 8:27 a.m., Adam B wrote:
> > src/slave/http.cpp, line 365
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/46203/diff/13/?file=1359473#file1359473line365>
> >
> >     Why pass the entire Slave down when you only use the flags?

Yes, much better approach.


> On April 26, 2016, 8:27 a.m., Adam B wrote:
> > src/tests/slave_authorization_tests.cpp, line 144
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/46203/diff/13/?file=1359475#file1359475line144>
> >
> >     After reading the description of the test, I expected to see ACLs that 
> > set permissive=false, but adds a rule for GetEndpoint(ANY, "/flags")
> >     What you're testing is fully permissive ACLs, which is a bit different, 
> > and probably tested throughout the rest of the existing tests.

Will change it. That way it'll be much clearer.


- Jan


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/46203/#review130538
-----------------------------------------------------------


On April 25, 2016, 2:50 p.m., Jan Schlicht wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/46203/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated April 25, 2016, 2:50 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos, Adam B, Alexander Rojas, and Benjamin Bannier.
> 
> 
> Bugs: MESOS-5142
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-5142
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> See summary.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   docs/configuration.md 86ba66ac62295ca148524bcb2e57fee560ac4ac5 
>   include/mesos/authorizer/acls.proto 
> c50deeb5565dfd5b3e5e7210283d9a36a3bfd579 
>   include/mesos/authorizer/authorizer.proto 
> 40d93ea257d1df8d22eee8a21667db90d579a8fe 
>   src/Makefile.am e024c6d65608a55765e527a8668c415723dcfcca 
>   src/authorizer/local/authorizer.cpp 
> 0a3805fe4ce8eb89e096e8cd4326035513ba892b 
>   src/slave/flags.cpp 10d2974bd2b6e79255fc894979607f0d2d00c315 
>   src/slave/http.cpp 537736d1fe42e8150bad91326299ef9a17041a8e 
>   src/slave/slave.hpp 20a4bcd0bb9dad06ea81fc4ad9b2fa462c69d2c5 
>   src/tests/slave_authorization_tests.cpp PRE-CREATION 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/46203/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> make check
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Jan Schlicht
> 
>

Reply via email to