----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/66420/#review200502 -----------------------------------------------------------
Fix it, then Ship it! Oops. I just realized as I was getting through this code review that it was just a code move into jobobject.hpp. You can read my comment if you'd like. But I was going to sign off anyway :) 3rdparty/stout/include/stout/os/windows/jobobject.hpp Lines 139 (patched) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/66420/#comment281247> This is interesting. I understand how you're using this template function to allocate this structure on the stack which you use a reinterpret_cast on later as a substitute for the JOBOBJECT_BASIC_PROCESS_ID_LIST. But is this really worth doing? Allocation and deallocation would happen entirely within this function. I imagine the data we need will be copied out before deallocation during the insert calls below on the set<Process> object, so the only real issue is the extra time associated with dynamic memory allocation/deallocation. What's hairy about the size calculations? I imagine it's not that bad, probably nothing you wouldn't do normally in C :) If you do end up staying with this structure, is there a reason the ProcessIdList member is a DWORD and not a ULONG_PTR, as per https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/ms684150(v=vs.85).aspx ? It's probably the case that on x86_64 that they are the same size, but why not mirror the structure identically? - John Kordich On April 4, 2018, 5:46 a.m., Andrew Schwartzmeyer wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/66420/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated April 4, 2018, 5:46 a.m.) > > > Review request for mesos, Akash Gupta, Eric Mumau, John Kordich, Joseph Wu, > and Michael Park. > > > Repository: mesos > > > Description > ------- > > The functions written to deal with job objects on Windows had become > large enough to warrant being refactored into their own file. Also > was the perfect opportunity to fix formatting issues. > > When including `jobobject.hpp` for `killtree.hpp`, other unnecessary > headers were removed. > > > Diffs > ----- > > 3rdparty/stout/include/Makefile.am 742bfc44d68d978dd2249ece500d6f64e4d7f02a > 3rdparty/stout/include/stout/os/windows/jobobject.hpp PRE-CREATION > 3rdparty/stout/include/stout/os/windows/killtree.hpp > ce8bdcd18305ffb758f22a6c2bbc7393675aebdf > 3rdparty/stout/include/stout/windows/os.hpp > 739ee4da3f09d2a9597d4451e755e77903e9287d > > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/66420/diff/1/ > > > Testing > ------- > > > Thanks, > > Andrew Schwartzmeyer > >
