Summary: cpsv: standardize arrival callback API(s) with SAF syntax [#561]
Review request for Trac Ticket(s): #561
Peer Reviewer(s): Hans/Mathi/Sirisha
Pull request to: <<LIST THE PERSON WITH PUSH ACCESS HERE>>
Affected branch(es): default
Development branch: default
--------------------------------
Impacted area Impact y/n
--------------------------------
Docs n
Build system n
RPM/packaging n
Configuration files n
Startup scripts n
SAF services n
OpenSAF services y
Core libraries n
Samples n
Tests n
Other n
Comments (indicate scope for each "y" above):
---------------------------------------------
Republisheing the patch by addressed following review comment :
1) Doxygen comments in the saCkpt header file (for future doc generation)
2) Sample code using this feature, preferably two small programs, one
writing and one using callbacks
(uploaded to to #ticket 561)
3) Those functions I asked about before should have TODO comments or
something similar
4) If saCkptInitialize_2 is invoked with wrong version, version parameter
is not being filled up according to the standard initialize API definitions.
5) If TrackCallback is provided as NULL during initialization and
saCkptTrack() is invoked on the handle, SA_AIS_ERR_INIT would be the closest
error value that needs to be returned. I have taken SynchronizeAsync()
API definition as the reference.
6) If saCkptTrack() API is invoked on the handle for which tracking has not
been started or the tracking has been stopped,
SA_AIS_ERR_NOT_EXIST needs to be returned by saCkptTrack() API. Please
refer to saClmClusterTrackStop() API in the CLM specification.
changeset bbe09c2380cfca0f46f50352cf32592ea0845e44
Author: A V Mahesh <mahesh.va...@oracle.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2013 12:16:35 +0530
cpsv: standardize arrival callback API(s) with SAF syntax [#561]
Added Files:
------------
osaf/libs/saf/include/saCkpt_B_02_03.h
Complete diffstat:
------------------
opensaf.spec.in | 1 +
osaf/libs/agents/saf/cpa/cpa_api.c | 547
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
osaf/libs/agents/saf/cpa/cpa_proc.c | 6 +-
osaf/libs/common/cpsv/cpsv_edu.c | 22 ++++-
osaf/libs/common/cpsv/include/cpa_cb.h | 4 +-
osaf/libs/common/cpsv/include/cpa_def.h | 2 +-
osaf/libs/common/cpsv/include/cpa_proc.h | 2 +-
osaf/libs/common/cpsv/include/cpsv.h | 7 +
osaf/libs/common/cpsv/include/cpsv_evt.h | 8 +-
osaf/libs/saf/include/Makefile.am | 1 +
osaf/libs/saf/include/saCkpt_B_02_03.h | 152 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
osaf/services/saf/cpsv/cpnd/cpnd_evt.c | 39 +++++++-
12 files changed, 775 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
Testing Commands:
-----------------
<<LIST THE COMMAND LINE TOOLS/STEPS TO TEST YOUR CHANGES>>
Testing, Expected Results:
--------------------------
<<PASTE COMMAND OUTPUTS / TEST RESULTS>>
Conditions of Submission:
-------------------------
<<HOW MANY DAYS BEFORE PUSHING, CONSENSUS ETC>>
Arch Built Started Linux distro
-------------------------------------------
mips n n
mips64 n n
x86 n n
x86_64 y y
powerpc n n
powerpc64 n n
Reviewer Checklist:
-------------------
[Submitters: make sure that your review doesn't trigger any checkmarks!]
Your checkin has not passed review because (see checked entries):
___ Your RR template is generally incomplete; it has too many blank entries
that need proper data filled in.
___ You have failed to nominate the proper persons for review and push.
___ Your patches do not have proper short+long header
___ You have grammar/spelling in your header that is unacceptable.
___ You have exceeded a sensible line length in your headers/comments/text.
___ You have failed to put in a proper Trac Ticket # into your commits.
___ You have incorrectly put/left internal data in your comments/files
(i.e. internal bug tracking tool IDs, product names etc)
___ You have not given any evidence of testing beyond basic build tests.
Demonstrate some level of runtime or other sanity testing.
___ You have ^M present in some of your files. These have to be removed.
___ You have needlessly changed whitespace or added whitespace crimes
like trailing spaces, or spaces before tabs.
___ You have mixed real technical changes with whitespace and other
cosmetic code cleanup changes. These have to be separate commits.
___ You need to refactor your submission into logical chunks; there is
too much content into a single commit.
___ You have extraneous garbage in your review (merge commits etc)
___ You have giant attachments which should never have been sent;
Instead you should place your content in a public tree to be pulled.
___ You have too many commits attached to an e-mail; resend as threaded
commits, or place in a public tree for a pull.
___ You have resent this content multiple times without a clear indication
of what has changed between each re-send.
___ You have failed to adequately and individually address all of the
comments and change requests that were proposed in the initial review.
___ You have a misconfigured ~/.hgrc file (i.e. username, email etc)
___ Your computer have a badly configured date and time; confusing the
the threaded patch review.
___ Your changes affect IPC mechanism, and you don't present any results
for in-service upgradability test.
___ Your changes affect user manual and documentation, your patch series
do not contain the patch that updates the Doxygen manual.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rapidly troubleshoot problems before they affect your business. Most IT
organizations don't have a clear picture of how application performance
affects their revenue. With AppDynamics, you get 100% visibility into your
Java,.NET, & PHP application. Start your 15-day FREE TRIAL of AppDynamics Pro!
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=84349831&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Opensaf-devel mailing list
Opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel
