Hi Hung, Reviewed and tested the patch. Ack.
/Neel. On Wednesday 09 September 2015 10:31 PM, Hung Nguyen wrote: > Summary: imm: Default values are assigned to empty-valued attributes when > sync [#1472] > Review request for Trac Ticket(s): 1472 > Peer Reviewer(s): AndersBj, Neelakanta, Zoran > Pull request to: Zoran > Affected branch(es): default(4.7), 4.6, 4.5 > Development branch: default(4.7) > > -------------------------------- > 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): > --------------------------------------------- > > changeset 908f7c34e491dd6e0a38a3f9f520ca6eecd49679 > Author: Hung Nguyen <[email protected]> > Date: Wed, 09 Sep 2015 19:12:49 +0700 > > imm: Don't assign default values to empty valued attributes when sync > [#1472] > > Don't assign default values to empty valued attributes when sync. This > fix > is for both CONFIG and RUNTIME objects. > > > Complete diffstat: > ------------------ > osaf/services/saf/immsv/immnd/ImmModel.cc | 12 ++---------- > 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) > > > Testing Commands: > ----------------- > << Test - CONFIG >> > test : SA_STRING_T [1] {RDN, CONFIG, INITIALIZED} > attr : SA_INT64_T [0] = 100 (0x64) {CONFIG, WRITEABLE} > > On a node, set attribute of an object that has default to empty. > root@SC-1:~# immcfg -c Test test=1 > root@SC-1:~# immcfg -a attr= test=1 > > Let another node join the cluster to start the sync. > > > Testing, Expected Results: > -------------------------- > Value of the attribute on the other node remains empty (not set to default > value). > root@SC-2:~# immlist -a attr test=1 > attr=<Empty> > > > Conditions of Submission: > ------------------------- > Ack from reviewers. > > > 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. > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Opensaf-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel
