Summary: <<FILL ME>> Review request for Trac Ticket(s): <<IF ANY LIST THE #>> Peer Reviewer(s): <<LIST THE TECH REVIEWER(S) / MAINTAINER(S) HERE>> Pull request to: <<LIST THE PERSON WITH PUSH ACCESS HERE>> Affected branch(es): <<LIST ALL AFFECTED BRANCH(ES)>> Development branch: <<IF ANY GIVE THE REPO URL>>
-------------------------------- Impacted area Impact y/n -------------------------------- Docs n Build system n RPM/packaging n Configuration files n Startup scripts n SAF services n OpenSAF services n Core libraries n Samples n Tests n Other n Comments (indicate scope for each "y" above): --------------------------------------------- <<EXPLAIN/COMMENT THE PATCH SERIES HERE>> changeset 51b7ec0452393a3cb14aabae845ea11cfa500712 Author: Hans Feldt <[email protected]> Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2014 10:45:00 +0200 logtrace: move tzset call to init [#1077] Calling tzset() for each trace creates a lot of overhead - taking locks, reading from file etc. This seems unneccessary just for supporting changed time zones which should be a very rare and one time event at system installation. The tzset() call is moved to logtrace init. changeset f4eb7acdd67b493cb92218e4d53a5fdddb5a6481 Author: Hans Feldt <[email protected]> Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2014 10:45:08 +0200 imm: remove trace between fork and exec [#1077] Any function/system call between fork and exec in the child process is a potential risk of deadlock. The lock data structure is copied from the parent process and a locked mutex will never get unlocked in the child since when the parent process does unlock it won't affect the child copy of the lock. To prevent this from happening, tracing is removed between fork and exec. changeset cded0261f367676697d7c3e0da4b2938c60e1215 Author: Hans Feldt <[email protected]> Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2014 10:45:12 +0200 ntf: remove trace between fork and exec [#1077] Any function/system call between fork and exec in the child process is a potential risk of deadlock. The lock data structure is copied from the parent process and a locked mutex will never get unlocked in the child since when the parent process does unlock it won't affect the child copy of the lock. To prevent this from happening, tracing is removed between fork and exec. Complete diffstat: ------------------ osaf/libs/core/common/logtrace.c | 3 ++- osaf/services/saf/immsv/immnd/immnd_proc.c | 3 --- osaf/services/saf/ntfsv/ntfs/ntfs_imcnutil.c | 1 - 3 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 5 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 n 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. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Want excitement? Manually upgrade your production database. When you want reliability, choose Perforce Perforce version control. Predictably reliable. http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=157508191&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk _______________________________________________ Opensaf-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel
