Summary: LOG: log_stream_config_change() renames files successfully, but makes return (-1) [#1366] Review request for Trac Ticket(s): #1366 Peer Reviewer(s): [email protected] Pull request to: [email protected] Affected branch(es): 4.5, 4.6, default 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 y OpenSAF services n Core libraries n Samples n Tests n Other n Comments (indicate scope for each "y" above): --------------------------------------------- changeset 61c1f53421e75072237ccde88fac3331dd058cf4 Author: Vu Minh Nguyen <[email protected]> Date: Mon, 04 May 2015 09:34:12 +0100 LOG: log_stream_config_change() renames files successfully, but makes return (-1) [#1366] Callers will invoke log_stream_config_chang() @ lgs_stream.c in two cases: 1. Request for old file closing and creating new files if create_files_f parameter sets to TRUE. 2. Just request for closing old files if create_files_f parameter sets to FALSE. In second case, that is correct to have fd closed (-1). So, make a value- returned judgment based on fd for all cases is not suitabe. Complete diffstat: ------------------ osaf/services/saf/logsv/lgs/lgs_stream.c | 6 +++++- 1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) Testing Commands: ----------------- Change logRootDirectory attribute, using immcfg command as below example: immcfg -a logRootDirectory=/repl_opensaf/saflog_1 logConfig=1,safApp=safLogService Testing, Expected Results: -------------------------- The following output is not found in trace log (e.g: osaflogd) "ER Old log files could not be renamed and closed for stream:" 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. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight. http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y _______________________________________________ Opensaf-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel
