----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/65395/#review197852 -----------------------------------------------------------
Fix it, then Ship it! src/checks/checker.cpp Lines 41 (patched) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/65395/#comment278143> Do you need to include this guy here? src/checks/checker_process.hpp Lines 94-95 (patched) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/65395/#comment278144> Are these passed by value on purpose? Here and below. src/checks/checker_process.cpp Lines 288 (patched) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/65395/#comment278147> Please avoid saying "health" in checker process: there are also non-interpreting checks! src/checks/checker_process.cpp Lines 288-289 (patched) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/65395/#comment278148> Let's mention that they are all launched directly from the library's user, i.e. the executor. src/checks/checker_process.cpp Lines 290-291 (patched) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/65395/#comment278149> ... but the checks still originate from the library's user, i.e., executor. src/checks/checker_process.cpp Lines 295 (patched) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/65395/#comment278151> The library uses Agent API to delegate running the command... src/checks/checker_process.cpp Lines 300 (patched) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/65395/#comment278152> I'd spell out the variable names here and bellow for aesthetic reasons. Leave the decision to you : ) src/checks/checker_process.cpp Lines 319 (patched) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/65395/#comment278154> Why space between `[=]` and `(`? Here and below. src/checks/checker_process.cpp Lines 332 (patched) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/65395/#comment278160> Can this create a copy if optimizations are turned off? Let's say `const runtime::Nested&` for clarity and consistency. src/checks/checker_process.cpp Lines 362-363 (original), 438-443 (patched) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/65395/#comment278162> Maybe move it closer to `cloneWithSetns()`? src/checks/checker_process.cpp Lines 440-442 (patched) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/65395/#comment278161> s/getCloneFunc/getCustomCloneFunc src/docker/executor.cpp Lines 44 (patched) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/65395/#comment278164> Do you need it here? src/launcher/default_executor.cpp Lines 48 (patched) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/65395/#comment278165> Do you need this include? - Alexander Rukletsov On Feb. 8, 2018, 5:49 p.m., Akash Gupta wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/65395/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated Feb. 8, 2018, 5:49 p.m.) > > > Review request for mesos, Alexander Rukletsov, Andrew Schwartzmeyer, and > Gaston Kleiman. > > > Bugs: MESOS-8498 > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-8498 > > > Repository: mesos > > > Description > ------- > > Refactored health check code to separate the logic for each check > type and runtime (Plain/Docker/Nested). Now the matrix of different > possiblilites is cleanly enumerated, making it easier to add > future health checks, such as the ones for Windows. > > > Diffs > ----- > > src/checks/checker.hpp 93502270f31e80c5f7c94b5b456625e9cdea1837 > src/checks/checker.cpp fff0aac504b4283a210f936e00c977fa60d88b3d > src/checks/checker_process.hpp 510f3b2e6e689faaf26595214ce377c2b5518f28 > src/checks/checker_process.cpp ddb197b8cc2c503fef5ae20af32f5881fff9833f > src/checks/health_checker.hpp 019fbd791f250ecc28ff59d779f90e7ccbf0c685 > src/checks/health_checker.cpp eaf9a18817eeeff7c29c7a4b9d1b183f398760a3 > src/docker/executor.cpp 80e2d81169f0d4303ca1ddbcef9fa87fe52601fc > src/launcher/default_executor.cpp 8720dada8bc6ca66f9e0fec6dc265eda3dcc7407 > src/launcher/executor.cpp e4b9785fed8cd106edcc178071687e82f54016e3 > > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/65395/diff/5/ > > > Testing > ------- > > make check > > > Thanks, > > Akash Gupta > >
