Hi Mathi, Have you had time to look at this?
If you have no feedback by this Thursday, I will ask Lennart to push the patch. Thanks. Regards, Vu. >-----Original Message----- >From: Vu Minh Nguyen [mailto:[email protected]] >Sent: Wednesday, November 04, 2015 3:32 PM >To: [email protected]; [email protected]; >[email protected] >Cc: [email protected] >Subject: [devel] [PATCH 0 of 1] Review Request for log: fix not check special >characters from saLogStreamFileName value [#1421] > >Summary: log: fix not check special characters from saLogStreamFileName value >[#1421] >Review request for Trac Ticket(s): #1421 >Peer Reviewer(s): [email protected]; [email protected]; >[email protected] >Pull request to: Lennart >Affected branch(es): All >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): >--------------------------------------------- > <<EXPLAIN/COMMENT THE PATCH SERIES HERE>> > >changeset 4e1fe66e277894c89282243d9c26e3fe2f4dfade >Author: Vu Minh Nguyen <[email protected]> >Date: Wed, 04 Nov 2015 15:23:51 +0700 > > log: fix not check special characters from saLogStreamFileName value >[#1421] > > logsv did not check if the created/modified the attribute value was a >valid > file name or not. > > To fix this, add validation - guarantee that forward slash '/' is not in >the > file name: > > >Complete diffstat: >------------------ > osaf/services/saf/logsv/lgs/lgs_evt.c | 7 +++++++ > osaf/services/saf/logsv/lgs/lgs_imm.c | 11 ++++++++++- > osaf/services/saf/logsv/lgs/lgs_util.c | 57 >+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > osaf/services/saf/logsv/lgs/lgs_util.h | 1 + > tests/logsv/tet_LogOiOps.c | 40 >++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > tests/logsv/tet_saLogStreamOpen_2.c | 51 >+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > 6 files changed, 166 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > > >Testing Commands: >----------------- >02 new added test cases. Run following test cases >logtest 2 49 >logtest 5 16 > > >Testing, Expected Results: >-------------------------- >All tests PASS > >Conditions of Submission: >------------------------- > Get ack from peer 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 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Opensaf-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel
