-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/24825/#review50943
-----------------------------------------------------------

Ship it!



src/slave/containerizer/isolators/cgroups/constants.hpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/24825/#comment88827>

    Shouldn't these be initialized in a .cpp because of the gcc 4.1.2 bug that 
affected master and slave constants? If we are officially not supporting 
gcc-4.1, I gues thats ok.



src/slave/containerizer/isolators/cgroups/mem.hpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/24825/#comment88828>

    How about we do this cleanup as part of 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-1582 instead of doing it here?


- Vinod Kone


On Aug. 18, 2014, 11:40 p.m., Jie Yu wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/24825/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Aug. 18, 2014, 11:40 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos, Benjamin Hindman, Timothy Chen, and Vinod Kone.
> 
> 
> Bugs: MESOS-1713
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-1713
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos-git
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> See summary.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   src/Makefile.am 5b2978a0adde4396ee02b1cce113a567b4c2d521 
>   src/docker/docker.cpp 73c62f93e3c203378fef2f4ef98ae5e5fdbb6461 
>   src/slave/containerizer/docker.cpp fe5b29167811d4ac2fe29070c70a04f84093a6ff 
>   src/slave/containerizer/isolators/cgroups/constants.hpp PRE-CREATION 
>   src/slave/containerizer/isolators/cgroups/cpushare.hpp 
> 19dde353528624336bd8674fa7b6142abc46435f 
>   src/slave/containerizer/isolators/cgroups/mem.hpp 
> c734dae834c3f771b2954868138a622b7712aa32 
>   src/slave/containerizer/isolators/cgroups/perf_event.hpp 
> 4ceb07a6e4f171788cfbabca78c14ae23ff183db 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/24825/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> make check
> 
> on mac
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Jie Yu
> 
>

Reply via email to