> On March 4, 2016, 3:30 p.m., Avinash sridharan wrote: > > src/slave/containerizer/mesos/isolators/network/cni.cpp, lines 108-115 > > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/44269/diff/4/?file=1280944#file1280944line108> > > > > isn't this the same as !nameValue.isSome() ? > > > > Also LOG(WARNING) should be LOG(ERROR) > > Qian Zhang wrote: > Please see > https://github.com/apache/mesos/blob/0.27.1/src/docker/docker.cpp#L255:L260 > for the existing way to handle the return value of `json.get().find()`. > > Avinash sridharan wrote: > Well... !isSome implies isNone or isError is true which is what you are > aiming for ? Will simplify things I guess. > > Qian Zhang wrote: > Let's follow the existing way, I think it is better to not introduce > inconsistence :-)
Inconsistence in terms of coding style is bad. But copying logic just for the sake of consistency doesn't make sense. Just because a logic is implemented a certain way doesn't mean we can't improve on it. I will leave it up to you, but would prefer if we can shorten the code if possible. > On March 4, 2016, 3:30 p.m., Avinash sridharan wrote: > > src/slave/containerizer/mesos/isolators/network/cni.cpp, line 108 > > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/44269/diff/4/?file=1280944#file1280944line108> > > > > Conver this to LOG(ERROR) > > Qian Zhang wrote: > I think it should be LOG(WARNING) if we are going to ignore something in > the `create()` method of an isolator, please see > `PortMappingIsolatorProcess::create()`: > > https://github.com/apache/mesos/blob/0.27.1/src/slave/containerizer/mesos/isolators/network/port_mapping.cpp#L1321 Semantically this is an error in the network configuration file. Please see my comments below about bailing out when a config/plugin error occurs. > On March 4, 2016, 3:30 p.m., Avinash sridharan wrote: > > src/slave/containerizer/mesos/isolators/network/cni.cpp, line 134 > > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/44269/diff/4/?file=1280944#file1280944line134> > > > > I don't understand this comment. We just made sure the plugin does not > > exist? So what does the comment imply "it can > > // still be valid as long as operator puts the CNI plugin binary > > // that it uses under '--network_cni_plugins_dir'." ? > > > > I think at this point we should return an error. If can't find an > > executable for a named network, the behavior will become undefined. We > > should bail at this point. > > Qian Zhang wrote: > My point is, if we can not find a plugin for a named network during > initilization, log a warning message to let operator know this issue, and > afterward operator can put the plugin in the plugin directory without > restarting agent, then the named network can still work. > > Avinash sridharan wrote: > Lets not rely on the operator heeding WARNING messages and fixing the > problem. My concern is that this is a `FATAL` error since before the operator > can rectify the error if containers are launched the behavior becomes > undefined. > > Qian Zhang wrote: > Agree, let's return an error :-) > > Qian Zhang wrote: > After more thinking, I think in this case, it makes more sense to log a > warning message and ignore the network config file rather than bail at this > point, because there can be other valid network config files. If in the end > there is no any valid network config files, we should definitely bail. I think we should not allow any errors in the configs/plugins passed by the operator . Reason being that frameworks are going to learn about networks out-of-band, and if there are config/plugin errors we will have to throw errors during task launch. Why should we allow the system to proceed knowing that this is going to lead to erroneous situation? The only way the operator can fix this error is by restarting the slave (and fixing the config), so might as well bail out sooner rather than later. - Avinash ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/44269/#review122077 ----------------------------------------------------------- On March 6, 2016, 4:03 p.m., Qian Zhang wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/44269/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated March 6, 2016, 4:03 p.m.) > > > Review request for mesos, Avinash sridharan, Gilbert Song, and Jie Yu. > > > Bugs: MESOS-4759 > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-4759 > > > Repository: mesos > > > Description > ------- > > Added the framework of 'network/cni' isolator. > > > Diffs > ----- > > src/CMakeLists.txt 8f57a5701073bf1eaaa223383e928cf5db8f8ae4 > src/Makefile.am a41e95ddeb838fdebf4ced953c4a29181916e261 > src/slave/containerizer/mesos/isolators/network/cni.hpp PRE-CREATION > src/slave/containerizer/mesos/isolators/network/cni.cpp PRE-CREATION > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/44269/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > make check > > > Thanks, > > Qian Zhang > >
