Ack. / Anders Widell
On 09/15/2014 01:43 PM, Hans Feldt wrote: > 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
