Summary:mds: improved mds logging [#520]
Review request for Trac Ticket(s): #520
Peer Reviewer(s): Zoran / Nagu
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 n
OpenSAF services n
Core libraries y
Samples n
Tests n
Other n
Comments (indicate scope for each "y" above):
---------------------------------------------
changeset e702c7de673631a651470663784b68640cdf3036
Author: A V Mahesh <mahesh.va...@oracle.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2015 09:21:31 +0530
mds: improved mds logging [#520] Replaced MDS manual log strings of
Entering in to <FUNCTION> and Leaving <FUNCTION> and with
TRACE_ENTER() & TRACE_LEAVE().
Fro example now : mcm_pvt_normal_snd_process_common() Entering &
Leaving show as follows in MDS log
-This reduces MDS log file SiZE ,
-This makes debugging eraser
-This give more clarity process in FUNCTION.
Sep 16 15:10:42.191708 osafamfd[32532] DBG |>>
mcm_pvt_normal_snd_process_common
Sep 16 15:10:42.192717 osafamfd[32532] DBG |<<
mcm_pvt_normal_snd_process_common
Complete diffstat:
------------------
osaf/libs/core/mds/include/mds_log.h | 3 +
osaf/libs/core/mds/mds_c_api.c | 596
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------------------------------------------------------
osaf/libs/core/mds/mds_c_db.c | 471
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------------------------------------------
osaf/libs/core/mds/mds_c_sndrcv.c | 76 ++++++---------
osaf/libs/core/mds/mds_dt_common.c | 2 +-
osaf/libs/core/mds/mds_dt_tcp.c | 40 +++++--
osaf/libs/core/mds/mds_dt_tipc.c | 38 ++++----
osaf/libs/core/mds/mds_dt_trans.c | 43 ++++----
osaf/libs/core/mds/mds_log.c | 2 +
osaf/libs/core/mds/mds_main.c | 42 ++++----
osaf/libs/core/mds/mds_papi.c | 19 +--
11 files changed, 641 insertions(+), 691 deletions(-)
Testing Commands:
-----------------
Before starting Opensaf do ` export MDS_LOG_LEVEL=5 `
and start Opensf observer the logging.
Testing, Expected 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 y y
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.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Monitor Your Dynamic Infrastructure at Any Scale With Datadog!
Get real-time metrics from all of your servers, apps and tools
in one place.
SourceForge users - Click here to start your Free Trial of Datadog now!
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=241902991&iu=/4140
_______________________________________________
Opensaf-devel mailing list
Opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel
