> On Dec. 12, 2017, 1:21 p.m., Greg Mann wrote: > > src/status_update_manager/status_update_manager_process.hpp > > Lines 513 (patched) > > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/64521/diff/1/?file=1912886#file1912886line515> > > > > AFAICT there's nothing preventing somebody from setting `latest_status` > > on an update they pass into this process, causing us to fail this check?
Added a validation in the SUM's `update` method. - Gaston ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/64521/#review193598 ----------------------------------------------------------- On Dec. 12, 2017, 4:25 p.m., Gaston Kleiman wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/64521/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated Dec. 12, 2017, 4:25 p.m.) > > > Review request for mesos, Chun-Hung Hsiao, Greg Mann, and Jie Yu. > > > Repository: mesos > > > Description > ------- > > Made `StatusUpdateManagerProcess` fill in the latest status update. > > > Diffs > ----- > > src/status_update_manager/status_update_manager_process.hpp > 1ac64410594134ce3e709d396d0a74a3d0aa2007 > src/tests/offer_operation_status_update_manager_tests.cpp > a5327d3d070a390f2ceb918dc53a024fbfe8777e > > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/64521/diff/3/ > > > Testing > ------- > > Added a new test, which passes on GNU/Linux. The other existing tests also > pass. > > > Thanks, > > Gaston Kleiman > >
