/subprocess_tests.cpp c8350cf
Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/52647/diff/
Testing
---
Made sure compilation, tests, and benchmarks worked with both gcc and clang.
Ran `make && make check && make bench`.
Thanks,
Aaron Wood
://reviews.apache.org/r/52886/diff/
Testing
---
Made sure compilation, tests, and benchmarks worked with both gcc and clang.
Ran make && make check && make bench.
Thanks,
Aaron Wood
optimizations. Overall the performance
hit was very small with a 3-8% overhead (optimizations brings this down
slightly). Most benchmarks were about 5% (or less) slower.
Thanks,
Aaron Wood
the performance
hit was very small with a 3-8% overhead (optimizations brings this down
slightly). Most benchmarks were about 5% (or less) slower.
Thanks,
Aaron Wood
. Overall the performance
hit was very small with a 3-8% overhead (optimizations brings this down
slightly). Most benchmarks were about 5% (or less) slower.
Thanks,
Aaron Wood
-----
On Oct. 14, 2016, 3:14 p.m., Aaron Wood wrote:
>
> ---
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/52647/
> --
th` is `ssize_t` (set on line 235)
- Aaron
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/52647/#review153024
---
On Oct. 14,
-fPIC` and `-fPIE` only to shared libs.
- Aaron
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/52645/#review153713
------
it:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/52696/#review153025
---
On Oct. 21, 2016, 6:29 p.m., Aaron Wood wrote:
>
> ---
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To rep
l. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/52754/#review153715
-------
On Oct. 21, 2016, 6:31 p.m., Aaron Wood wrote:
>
> ---
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/52754/
>
/process_tests.cpp 3936f47
3rdparty/libprocess/src/tests/subprocess_tests.cpp c8350cf
Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/52754/diff/
Testing
---
Made sure compilation, tests, and benchmarks worked with both gcc and clang.
Ran make && make check && make bench.
Thanks,
Aaron Wood
worked with both gcc and clang.
Ran `make && make check && make bench`.
Thanks,
Aaron Wood
--------
On Oct. 21, 2016, 6:29 p.m., Aaron Wood wrote:
>
> ---
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/52886/
> -
3rdparty/stout/tests/os_tests.cpp 0b7ee07
3rdparty/stout/tests/strings_tests.cpp 7dd3301
Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/52886/diff/
Testing
---
Made sure compilation, tests, and benchmarks worked with both gcc and clang.
Ran make && make check && make bench.
Thanks,
Aaron Wood
ghtly). Most benchmarks were about 5% (or less) slower.
Thanks,
Aaron Wood
rings this down
slightly). Most benchmarks were about 5% (or less) slower.
Thanks,
Aaron Wood
and without
the flags being used with and without optimizations. Overall the performance
hit was very small with a 3-8% overhead (optimizations brings this down
slightly). Most benchmarks were about 5% (or less) slower.
Thanks,
Aaron Wood
). Most benchmarks were about 5% (or less) slower.
Thanks,
Aaron Wood
the flags being used with and without optimizations. Overall the performance
hit was very small with a 3-8% overhead (optimizations brings this down
slightly). Most benchmarks were about 5% (or less) slower.
Thanks,
Aaron Wood
ons and without
the flags being used with and without optimizations. Overall the performance
hit was very small with a 3-8% overhead (optimizations brings this down
slightly). Most benchmarks were about 5% (or less) slower.
Thanks,
Aaron Wood
t.
I agree with what you're saying about the casting here. I'll swap it around.
- Aaron
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/52647/#review154530
---
r/52695/#review154527
---
On Nov. 2, 2016, 3:14 p.m., Aaron Wood wrote:
>
> ---
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/52695/
> --
-97fb4700a882__optimized.txt
No hardening applied and no --enable-optimized
https://reviews.apache.org/media/uploaded/files/2016/11/02/b32667ce-3e3b-4d2b-b4f8-4c2404a0fc1c__unoptimized.txt
Thanks,
Aaron Wood
--
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/52695/#review154527
-------
On Nov. 2, 2016, 3:14 p.m., Aaron Wood wrote:
>
> --
On Nov. 2, 2016, 3:35 p.m., Aaron Wood wrote:
>
> ---
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/52696/
> ---
-5ac60daaf498__optimized.txt
No hardening applied and no --enable-optimized
https://reviews.apache.org/media/uploaded/files/2016/11/02/3baa96cf-be05-4ac0-ad4c-ef571386e8f4__unoptimized.txt
Thanks,
Aaron Wood
unravel the
>overall build process more to fix that issue.
- Aaron
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/52645/#review154524
-------
On Nov. 1, 2016, 7:37 p.m., Aaron Wood wrote:
>
e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/52695/#review154527
-------
On Nov. 2, 2016, 3:14 p.m., Aaron Wood wrote:
>
> ---
> This is an automatically ge
/subprocess_tests.cpp 0dc1c62
Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/52754/diff/
Testing
---
Made sure compilation, tests, and benchmarks worked with both gcc and clang.
Ran make && make check && make bench.
Thanks,
Aaron Wood
To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/52886/#review154529
---
On Oct. 27, 2016, 7:32 p.m., Aaron Wood wrote:
>
> ---
> This is an automatica
/tests/os_tests.cpp 0b7ee07
3rdparty/stout/tests/strings_tests.cpp 7dd3301
Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/52886/diff/
Testing
---
Made sure compilation, tests, and benchmarks worked with both gcc and clang.
Ran make && make check && make bench.
Thanks,
Aaron Wood
clang.
Ran `make && make check && make bench`.
Thanks,
Aaron Wood
ointer
modification done in a separate patch.
- Aaron
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/52645/#review154524
------
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/52695/#review154527
---
On Nov. 2, 2016, 3:14 p.m., Aaron Wood wrote:
>
>
ointer
modification done in a separate patch.
- Aaron
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/52696/#review154526
------
> On Nov. 2, 2016, 9:33 a.m., Benjamin Bannier wrote:
> > src/Makefile.am, line 120
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/52645/diff/7/?file=1550864#file1550864line120>
> >
> > Not sure we want to remove the existing `-Werror`.
>
> Aaron Wood wrote:
>
benchmarks were about 5% (or less) slower.
Thanks,
Aaron Wood
-5ac60daaf498__optimized.txt
No hardening applied and no --enable-optimized
https://reviews.apache.org/media/uploaded/files/2016/11/02/3baa96cf-be05-4ac0-ad4c-ef571386e8f4__unoptimized.txt
Thanks,
Aaron Wood
-b1b9-97fb4700a882__optimized.txt
No hardening applied and no --enable-optimized
https://reviews.apache.org/media/uploaded/files/2016/11/02/b32667ce-3e3b-4d2b-b4f8-4c2404a0fc1c__unoptimized.txt
Thanks,
Aaron Wood
/896944ea-9b31-4d62-b1b9-97fb4700a882__optimized.txt
No hardening applied and no --enable-optimized
https://reviews.apache.org/media/uploaded/files/2016/11/02/b32667ce-3e3b-4d2b-b4f8-4c2404a0fc1c__unoptimized.txt
Thanks,
Aaron Wood
-5ac60daaf498__optimized.txt
No hardening applied and no --enable-optimized
https://reviews.apache.org/media/uploaded/files/2016/11/02/3baa96cf-be05-4ac0-ad4c-ef571386e8f4__unoptimized.txt
Thanks,
Aaron Wood
slightly). Most benchmarks were about 5% (or less) slower.
Thanks,
Aaron Wood
://reviews.apache.org/r/52754/diff/
Testing
---
Made sure compilation, tests, and benchmarks worked with both gcc and clang.
Ran make && make check && make bench.
Thanks,
Aaron Wood
://reviews.apache.org/r/52754/diff/
Testing
---
Made sure compilation, tests, and benchmarks worked with both gcc and clang.
Ran make && make check && make bench.
Thanks,
Aaron Wood
/strings_tests.cpp 7dd3301
Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/52886/diff/
Testing
---
Made sure compilation, tests, and benchmarks worked with both gcc and clang.
Ran make && make check && make bench.
Thanks,
Aaron Wood
://reviews.apache.org/r/52754/diff/
Testing
---
Made sure compilation, tests, and benchmarks worked with both gcc and clang.
Ran make && make check && make bench.
Thanks,
Aaron Wood
without
the flags being used with and without optimizations. Overall the performance
hit was very small with a 3-8% overhead (optimizations brings this down
slightly). Most benchmarks were about 5% (or less) slower.
Thanks,
Aaron Wood
/3baa96cf-be05-4ac0-ad4c-ef571386e8f4__unoptimized.txt
Thanks,
Aaron Wood
/uploaded/files/2016/11/02/b32667ce-3e3b-4d2b-b4f8-4c2404a0fc1c__unoptimized.txt
Thanks,
Aaron Wood
> On Nov. 2, 2016, 9:33 a.m., Benjamin Bannier wrote:
> > src/Makefile.am, line 120
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/52645/diff/7/?file=1550864#file1550864line120>
> >
> > Not sure we want to remove the existing `-Werror`.
>
> Aaron Wood wrote:
>
-ef571386e8f4__unoptimized.txt
Thanks,
Aaron Wood
- Aaron
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/52696/#review154526
---
On Nov. 9, 2016, 7:05 p.m., Aaron Wood wrote:
>
>
/b32667ce-3e3b-4d2b-b4f8-4c2404a0fc1c__unoptimized.txt
Thanks,
Aaron Wood
,
Aaron Wood
used with and without optimizations. Overall the performance
hit was very small with a 3-8% overhead (optimizations brings this down
slightly). Most benchmarks were about 5% (or less) slower.
Thanks,
Aaron Wood
atically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/52647/#review156238
---
On Nov. 7, 2016, 4:45 p.m., Aaron Wood wrote:
>
> ---
> This is an automatically generated e-m
add a .h at the time :)
- Aaron
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/52647/#review156238
---
On Nov. 7,
worked with both gcc and clang.
Ran `make && make check && make bench`.
Thanks,
Aaron Wood
& make bench.
Thanks,
Aaron Wood
with
> > `CHAR_MAX` in the first place...?
>
> Aaron Wood wrote:
> I'm not 100% clear on this but my guess is that it's from a negotiated
> max body size between the server and clients within Mesos...?
>
> James Peach wrote:
> AFAICT this is assi
--
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/52645/#review156367
---
On Nov. 9, 2016, 7:37 p.m., Aaron Wood wrote:
>
> ---
less) slower.
Thanks,
Aaron Wood
.
Thanks,
Aaron Wood
.
Thanks,
Aaron Wood
/02/046b37a9-5aff-4543-b3bb-5ac60daaf498__optimized.txt
No hardening applied and no --enable-optimized
https://reviews.apache.org/media/uploaded/files/2016/11/02/3baa96cf-be05-4ac0-ad4c-ef571386e8f4__unoptimized.txt
Thanks,
Aaron Wood
/files/2016/11/02/896944ea-9b31-4d62-b1b9-97fb4700a882__optimized.txt
No hardening applied and no --enable-optimized
https://reviews.apache.org/media/uploaded/files/2016/11/02/b32667ce-3e3b-4d2b-b4f8-4c2404a0fc1c__unoptimized.txt
Thanks,
Aaron Wood
-5ac60daaf498__optimized.txt
No hardening applied and no --enable-optimized
https://reviews.apache.org/media/uploaded/files/2016/11/02/3baa96cf-be05-4ac0-ad4c-ef571386e8f4__unoptimized.txt
Thanks,
Aaron Wood
-9b31-4d62-b1b9-97fb4700a882__optimized.txt
No hardening applied and no --enable-optimized
https://reviews.apache.org/media/uploaded/files/2016/11/02/b32667ce-3e3b-4d2b-b4f8-4c2404a0fc1c__unoptimized.txt
Thanks,
Aaron Wood
). Most benchmarks were about 5% (or less) slower.
Thanks,
Aaron Wood
-5aff-4543-b3bb-5ac60daaf498__optimized.txt
No hardening applied and no --enable-optimized
https://reviews.apache.org/media/uploaded/files/2016/11/02/3baa96cf-be05-4ac0-ad4c-ef571386e8f4__unoptimized.txt
Thanks,
Aaron Wood
rings this down
slightly). Most benchmarks were about 5% (or less) slower.
Thanks,
Aaron Wood
2016/11/02/896944ea-9b31-4d62-b1b9-97fb4700a882__optimized.txt
No hardening applied and no --enable-optimized
https://reviews.apache.org/media/uploaded/files/2016/11/02/b32667ce-3e3b-4d2b-b4f8-4c2404a0fc1c__unoptimized.txt
Thanks,
Aaron Wood
is applied
to `MESOS_CPPFLAGS` thus failing the whole build.
Diffs
-
src/Makefile.am abcf7eed7
Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/54949/diff/
Testing
---
Build all of Mesos from source.
Thanks,
Aaron Wood
applied to
MESOS_CPPFLAGS thus failing the whole build.
Diffs
-
3rdparty/libprocess/Makefile.am c33ae4306
Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/54950/diff/
Testing
---
Build all of Mesos from source.
Thanks,
Aaron Wood
applied to
MESOS_CPPFLAGS thus failing the whole build.
Diffs
-
3rdparty/stout/Makefile.am 2d27da7e6
Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/54951/diff/
Testing
---
Build all of Mesos from source.
Thanks,
Aaron Wood
hardening.
Diffs
-
src/Makefile.am abcf7eed7
Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/54953/diff/
Testing
---
../configure --disable-python --disable-java && make
../configure --disable-python --disable-java --disable-hardening && make
Thanks,
Aaron Wood
u're right, good catch.
- Aaron
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/54953/#review159886
---
On Dec.
e-python --disable-java --disable-hardening && make
Thanks,
Aaron Wood
also properly starts and
successfully runs with the exception of an issue with Mesos containers
(addressed in a separate review).
Thanks,
Aaron Wood
piled Mesos on ARM64 with no failures. Mesos also properly starts and
successfully runs with the exception of an issue with Mesos containers
(addressed in a separate review).
Thanks,
Aaron Wood
piled Mesos on ARM64 with no failures. Mesos also properly starts and
successfully runs with the exception of an issue with Mesos containers
(addressed in https://reviews.apache.org/r/54996/).
Thanks,
Aaron Wood
and am currently running it in a test cluster. Launched
both Docker and Mesos tasks via Marathon without any resulting crash (initial
crash only happened with Mesos containerizer + linux_launcher, not with the
posix_launcher).
Thanks,
Aaron Wood
piled Mesos on ARM64 with no failures. Mesos also properly starts and
successfully runs/launches tasks with the exception of a crash when using the
linux_launcher and Mesos containers. That fix is addressed in
https://reviews.apache.org/r/54996/
Thanks,
Aaron Wood
posix_launcher).
Thanks,
Aaron Wood
).
Thanks,
Aaron Wood
he.org/r/54996/#review160159
---
On Dec. 29, 2016, 7:03 p.m., Aaron Wood wrote:
>
> ---
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://re
currently running it in a test cluster. Launched
both Docker and Mesos tasks via Marathon without any resulting crash (initial
crash only happened with Mesos containerizer + linux_launcher, not with the
posix_launcher).
Thanks,
Aaron Wood
tps://reviews.apache.org/r/54996/#comment231598>
Anyone see a way around this reinterpret_cast?
- Aaron Wood
On Jan. 4, 2017, 12:26 a.m., Aaron Wood wrote:
>
> ---
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply,
e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/54996/#review160464
---
On Jan. 4, 2017, 12:26 a.m., Aaron Wood wrote:
>
> ---
> This is an au
> > ```
> > void * Stack::start() {
> > return (uint8_t *)address + size;
> > }
> > ```
>
> Aaron Wood wrote:
> Don't we want to avoid C-style casts?
>
> James Peach wrote:
> Sure, you could `static_cast` here. Not
-
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/54996/#review160513
---
On Jan. 4, 2017, 12:26 a.m., Aaron Wood wrote:
>
> ---
> This is an automat
with the
posix_launcher).
Thanks,
Aaron Wood
");
> > }
> >
> > return stack;
> > }
> > ```
> >
> > We can get rid of the `allocate` function. Once created, it's by
> > default allocated.
>
> Aaron Wood wrote:
> `address` and `siz
> > ```
> > void * Stack::start() {
> > return (uint8_t *)address + size;
> > }
> > ```
>
> Aaron Wood wrote:
> Don't we want to avoid C-style casts?
>
> James Peach wrote:
> Sure, you could `static_cast` here. Not m
case.
- Aaron
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/54996/#review160464
---
On Jan. 4, 2017, 9:28 p.m., Aaron Wood wrote:
>
-
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/54996/#review160464
---
On Jan. 4, 2017, 9:28 p.m., Aaron Wood wrote:
>
>
> > ```
> > void * Stack::start() {
> > return (uint8_t *)address + size;
> > }
> > ```
>
> Aaron Wood wrote:
> Don't we want to avoid C-style casts?
>
> James Peach wrote:
> Sure, you could `static_cast` here. Not m
tps://reviews.apache.org/r/54996/#comment231691>
Looks like `posix_memalign` never sets `errno`. Need to change this to
return `Error`.
- Aaron Wood
On Jan. 4, 2017, 9:28 p.m., Aaron Wood wrote:
>
> ---
> This is an automatica
happened with Mesos containerizer + linux_launcher, not with the
posix_launcher).
Thanks,
Aaron Wood
ply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/54996/#review160821
-------
On Jan. 4, 2017, 9:55 p.m., Aaron Wood wrote:
>
> ---
> This is an automatically ge
1 - 100 of 207 matches
Mail list logo
