Hi Anders,

I have missed this test case. I'm pretty sure it's a leak in server side

Thanks,
Minh
On 7/30/2014 10:20 PM, Anders Widell wrote:
> See my comments inline.
>
> / Anders W
>
> On 07/23/2014 06:55 AM, minhchau wrote:
>> Hi Anders W,
>>
>> Please see comments inline
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Minh
>>
>> On 7/22/2014 11:21 PM, Anders Widell wrote:
>>> Hi!
>>>
>>> I have started looking at this now. Two comments so far:
>>>
>>> 1) In NtfFilter::cmpSaNameT(), do you really have to duplicate the 
>>> strings? I think it should be fine to just get pointers to the 
>>> strings using saAisNameBorrow() and then compare the original 
>>> pointers. The function decodeSaNameT() guarantees that the SaNameT 
>>> will have a terminating NUL character, so the original pointers 
>>> should be safe to use at least if they were produced by this function.
>>
>> [Minh]: I don't have to duplicate strings here, and so the 
>> ntfs_sanamet_strdup will not be used anywhere else, it will be removed
>>
>>> 2) Shouldn't the ntfsv_filter_header_free() function loop through 
>>> notificationObjects and notifyingObjects and call 
>>> osaf_extended_namefree() on each name in them?
>>
>> [Minh]: ntfsv_filter_header_free() should not call 
>> osaf_extended_name_free() for each name in notificationObjects and 
>> notifyingObjects.  Those filter objects hold the strings by using 
>> saAisNameLend(), so their strings pointers should be freed by the 
>> client.
> Yes I agree, since this function is used on the client side it should 
> not call osaf_extended_name_free(). But what about the server side? 
> Are the strings freed on the server side? Maybe there is code 
> somewhere that does this, but I haven't found it. One possibility 
> could be to call osaf_extended_name_free() ONLY on the server side.
>>
>>> / Anders Widell
>>>
>>> On 07/15/2014 08:16 AM, Minh Hon Chau wrote:
>>>> Summary: NTF: Support DNs longer than 255 bytes [#873] v3
>>>> Review request for Trac Ticket(s): [#873]
>>>> Peer Reviewer(s): AndersW, HansF, Praveen, Mathi, Zoran, AndersBj
>>>> Pull request to:
>>>> 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            y
>>>>   OpenSAF services        n
>>>>   Core libraries          n
>>>>   Samples                 n
>>>>   Tests                   n
>>>>   Other                   n
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Comments (indicate scope for each "y" above):
>>>> ---------------------------------------------
>>>> Patch series version 3:
>>>>   - Fix endian issue in common library
>>>>   - Not allow objects having length greater than kMaxDnLength
>>>>     in ntfread, ntfsend.
>>>>   - Add testcase for AdditionalInfo with extended SaNameT
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> changeset 41e6acf50d610229b7dbf1590a5d98d9d2e80dae
>>>> Author:    Minh Hon Chau <[email protected]>
>>>> Date:    Tue, 15 Jul 2014 15:50:16 +1000
>>>>
>>>>     NTF: Adapt NTF API to support long DNs [#873]
>>>>
>>>> changeset c6092d94fae5c0db5b98e91bc68d0d58dc066c31
>>>> Author:    Minh Hon Chau <[email protected]>
>>>> Date:    Tue, 15 Jul 2014 15:50:16 +1000
>>>>
>>>>     NTF: Adapt NTF common library to support long DNs [#873] v3
>>>>
>>>>     (1)Fix endian issue in ntfs_sanamet_length, ntfsv_sanamet_alloc,
>>>>     ntfsv_sanamet_steal
>>>>
>>>> changeset d04dcc662b9b498701764557169ce5fb13eb6930
>>>> Author:    Minh Hon Chau <[email protected]>
>>>> Date:    Tue, 15 Jul 2014 15:50:16 +1000
>>>>
>>>>     NTF: Adapt NTF osaf service to support long DNs [#873]
>>>>
>>>> changeset 019e5387c457294db13b1a2ccbb0eb28f6b9cb62
>>>> Author:    Minh Hon Chau <[email protected]>
>>>> Date:    Tue, 15 Jul 2014 15:50:16 +1000
>>>>
>>>>     NTF: Adapt NTFIMCND to support long DNs [#873]
>>>>
>>>> changeset 97fd2415132ed2e3d934774d00294e2c81754204
>>>> Author:    Minh Hon Chau <[email protected]>
>>>> Date:    Tue, 15 Jul 2014 15:50:16 +1000
>>>>
>>>>     NTF: Adapt NTF tools (ntfread, ntfsend, ntfsubscribe) to 
>>>> support long DNs
>>>>     [#873] v2
>>>>
>>>>     (1) Not allow objects specified in command having string 
>>>> greater than
>>>>     kMaxDnLength
>>>>
>>>> changeset 6f31240a26d0c3757a6f13da82cff9d9244f2325
>>>> Author:    Minh Hon Chau <[email protected]>
>>>> Date:    Tue, 15 Jul 2014 15:50:16 +1000
>>>>
>>>>     NTF: Add ntftest test cases for notification with long dn 
>>>> objects [#873] v2
>>>>
>>>>     (1) Add testcase for AdditionalInfo with extended SaNameT
>>>>
>>>> changeset 44c410176a04b5cd260f8914da117386c740b461
>>>> Author:    Minh Hon Chau <[email protected]>
>>>> Date:    Tue, 15 Jul 2014 15:50:16 +1000
>>>>
>>>>     Temporary patch to solve compilation dependency
>>>>
>>>>     This patch is not part of #873, it's made to solve the 
>>>> dependency since NTF
>>>>     is using immutil.c and saflog.c. NOTE that it will not be 
>>>> pushed together
>>>>     with #873
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Added Files:
>>>> ------------
>>>>   tests/ntfsv/tet_longDnObject_notification.c
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Complete diffstat:
>>>> ------------------
>>>>   osaf/libs/agents/saf/ntfa/Makefile.am               |    1 +
>>>>   osaf/libs/agents/saf/ntfa/ntfa_api.c                |   25 +-
>>>>   osaf/libs/common/ntfsv/Makefile.am                  |    1 +
>>>>   osaf/libs/common/ntfsv/include/ntfsv_mem.h          |    7 +
>>>>   osaf/libs/common/ntfsv/ntfsv_enc_dec.c              |   37 ++-
>>>>   osaf/libs/common/ntfsv/ntfsv_mem.c                  |  151 
>>>> +++++++++++-
>>>>   osaf/libs/saf/libSaNtf/Makefile.am                  |    1 +
>>>>   osaf/services/saf/ntfsv/ntfimcnd/Makefile.am        |    2 +
>>>>   osaf/services/saf/ntfsv/ntfimcnd/ntfimcn_imm.c      |   91 ++++---
>>>>   osaf/services/saf/ntfsv/ntfimcnd/ntfimcn_notifier.c |   54 ++--
>>>>   osaf/services/saf/ntfsv/ntfs/Makefile.am            |    1 +
>>>>   osaf/services/saf/ntfsv/ntfs/NtfFilter.cc           |   34 +-
>>>>   osaf/services/saf/ntfsv/ntfs/NtfLogger.cc           |    5 +-
>>>>   osaf/services/saf/ntfsv/ntfs/ntfs_evt.c             |    5 +-
>>>>   osaf/services/saf/ntfsv/ntfs/ntfs_main.c            |    5 +
>>>>   osaf/tools/safimm/src/immutil.c                     |   57 ++--
>>>>   osaf/tools/saflog/src/saflog.c                      |   10 +-
>>>>   osaf/tools/safntf/include/ntfclient.h               |    3 +-
>>>>   osaf/tools/safntf/ntfread/Makefile.am               |    6 +-
>>>>   osaf/tools/safntf/ntfread/ntfread.c                 |   23 +-
>>>>   osaf/tools/safntf/ntfsend/Makefile.am               |    6 +-
>>>>   osaf/tools/safntf/ntfsend/ntfsend.c                 |   29 +-
>>>>   osaf/tools/safntf/ntfsubscribe/Makefile.am          |    6 +-
>>>>   osaf/tools/safntf/ntfsubscribe/ntfsubscribe.c       |    4 +
>>>>   osaf/tools/safntf/src/Makefile.am                   |    1 +
>>>>   osaf/tools/safntf/src/ntfclient.c                   |   58 ++--
>>>>   tests/ntfsv/Makefile.am                             |    3 +-
>>>>   tests/ntfsv/tet_longDnObject_notification.c         |  957 
>>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>  
>>>>
>>>>   tests/unit_test_fw/inc/util.h                       |    5 +-
>>>>   tests/unit_test_fw/src/Makefile.am                  |    1 +
>>>>   tests/unit_test_fw/src/util.c                       |   14 +-
>>>>   31 files changed, 1372 insertions(+), 231 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Testing Commands:
>>>> -----------------
>>>>   ntftest
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Testing, Expected Results:
>>>> --------------------------
>>>>   All tests pass (plus testsuite 35)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 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          n
>>>> 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.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Infragistics Professional
Build stunning WinForms apps today!
Reboot your WinForms applications with our WinForms controls. 
Build a bridge from your legacy apps to the future.
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=153845071&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Opensaf-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel

Reply via email to