-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/58939/#review174106
-----------------------------------------------------------




src/slave/containerizer/mesos/containerizer.cpp
Lines 1162-1172 (patched)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/58939/#comment247209>

    Why doing this check after the rootfs has been provisioned? I'd prefer if 
we can check before provisioning the fs.


- Jie Yu


On May 5, 2017, 6:07 p.m., Chun-Hung Hsiao wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/58939/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated May 5, 2017, 6:07 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos, Anand Mazumdar, Gilbert Song, and Jie Yu.
> 
> 
> Bugs: mesos-7374
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/mesos-7374
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> Checked if the 'filesystem/linux' isolator is enabled and the 'linux'
> launcher is used when launching a mesos containerizer with an image
> under Linux. This prevents the executor from messing up with the host
> filesystem. The check is in `MesosContainerizerProcess::prepare()`
> after provisioning and before launching, since provisioning itself
> does not depend on the filesystem isolator.
> 
> Also checked that the 'filesystem/linux' is enabled and the 'linux'
> launcher is used when enabling the 'docker/runtime' isolator.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   src/slave/containerizer/mesos/containerizer.cpp 
> b58baed64480e22f640a4852537f85922ed382ae 
>   src/slave/containerizer/mesos/isolators/docker/runtime.cpp 
> 08350e638a0f20746e369cdc78c96126f2e1df3f 
>   src/slave/containerizer/mesos/provisioner/provisioner.cpp 
> be45fc59027f176b43b767e9441fd8089ceec7b4 
> 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/58939/diff/3/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> sudo make check
> Manually tested on a simplified case of mesos-7374.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Chun-Hung Hsiao
> 
>

Reply via email to