Summary: dtm: Use inotify to improve response time for transport monitor process
Review request for Trac Ticket(s): [#2091]
Peer Reviewer(s): Ramesh, AndersW, Mahesh
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 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 538cf180268f522643c45ae6013903b7cab92f12
Author: Hans Nordeback <hans.nordeb...@ericsson.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2016 13:37:18 +0200
base: Use inotify to improve response time for transport monitor process
[#2091]
changeset 62dcc5709598eca0d8bc757bff1e35d24a8b906a
Author: Hans Nordeback <hans.nordeb...@ericsson.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2016 16:50:27 +0200
base: Unit tests for FileNotify [#2091]
changeset 6d2058182af04111f0127683c6e076fb5859977b
Author: Hans Nordeback <hans.nordeb...@ericsson.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2016 16:52:55 +0200
dtm: Use inotify to improve response time for transport monitor process
[#2091]
Added Files:
------------
osaf/libs/core/cplusplus/base/file_notify.cc
osaf/libs/core/cplusplus/base/file_notify.h
osaf/libs/core/cplusplus/base/tests/file_notify_test.cc
Complete diffstat:
------------------
osaf/libs/core/cplusplus/base/Makefile.am | 2 +
osaf/libs/core/cplusplus/base/file_notify.cc | 163
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
osaf/libs/core/cplusplus/base/file_notify.h | 84
++++++++++++++++++++++++++
osaf/libs/core/cplusplus/base/tests/Makefile.am | 7 +-
osaf/libs/core/cplusplus/base/tests/file_notify_test.cc | 82
++++++++++++++++++++++++++
5 files changed, 336 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
Testing Commands:
-----------------
<<LIST THE COMMAND LINE TOOLS/STEPS TO TEST YOUR CHANGES>>
Testing, Expected Results:
--------------------------
<<PASTE COMMAND OUTPUTS / TEST 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.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Opensaf-devel mailing list
Opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel
