Hi Hung, Reviewed and tested the patch. Ack with the following comment.
comment: 1. In getAllWritableAttributes function objName must be converted to nameToInternal. /Neel. On Friday 05 February 2016 03:57 PM, Hung Nguyen wrote: > Summary: imm: OiCcbObjectModifyCallback for appliers should include > attributes that is not modified [#1651] > Review request for Trac Ticket(s): 1651 > Peer Reviewer(s): Zoran, Neel > Pull request to: > Affected branch(es): default(5.0) > Development branch: default(5.0) > > -------------------------------- > 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 e068cd17b3f20810d1499fadb25e156367e20f99 > Author: Hung Nguyen <[email protected]> > Date: Fri, 05 Feb 2016 16:52:40 +0700 > > imm: Send all writable attributes to applier in > OiCcbObjectModifyCallback > [#1651] > > This feature is only for appliers with version A.2.17 or later. Appliers > which are initialized as A.2.17 or later MUST support > SA_IMM_ATTR_VALUES_REPLACE in their callbacks. > > > Complete diffstat: > ------------------ > osaf/services/saf/immsv/immnd/ImmModel.cc | 143 > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------- > osaf/services/saf/immsv/immnd/ImmModel.hh | 11 ++++++++- > osaf/services/saf/immsv/immnd/immnd_evt.c | 28 ++++++++++++++++++++---- > osaf/services/saf/immsv/immnd/immnd_init.h | 4 +++ > 4 files changed, 157 insertions(+), 29 deletions(-) > > > Testing Commands: > ----------------- > > > > Testing, Expected Results: > -------------------------- > Use applier to check the received attr-mods in OiCcbObjectModifyCallback. > > > 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. > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Site24x7 APM Insight: Get Deep Visibility into Application Performance APM + Mobile APM + RUM: Monitor 3 App instances at just $35/Month Monitor end-to-end web transactions and take corrective actions now Troubleshoot faster and improve end-user experience. Signup Now! http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=272487151&iu=/4140 _______________________________________________ Opensaf-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel
