Hi, I shall be pushing this patch next week. I have already attached samples(for reference) to the ticket, will send that separately for review after updating the samples.
Thanks, AVM. On 12/19/2013 2:07 PM, Hans Feldt wrote: > I will not have time to review this until after new year. And I really > would like to. > Still missing a resend of the review with the comments we currently > have and the sample programs included (under samples/ckpt I guess). > /Hans > > On 12/19/2013 07:53 AM, mahesh.va...@oracle.com wrote: >> 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
