Hi I will push this one tomorrow unless I get some last minute comments
Thanks Lennart > -----Original Message----- > From: Rafael Odzakow > Sent: den 19 oktober 2016 12:52 > To: Lennart Lund <lennart.l...@ericsson.com>; > reddy.neelaka...@oracle.com > Cc: opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > Subject: Re: [PATCH 0 of 1] Review Request for smf: Admin owner set > needed if new handles has been created [#2122] > > ACK > > > On 10/18/2016 03:54 PM, Lennart Lund wrote: > > Summary: smf: Admin owner set needed if new handles has been created > > Review request for Trac Ticket(s): #2122 > > Peer Reviewer(s): rafael.odza...@ericsson.com > > Pull request to: > > Affected branch(es): 5.1 and devel > > Development branch: > > > > -------------------------------- > > 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 79ffb701265c7ebea1fc48d04679e19c311f7e12 > > Author: Lennart Lund <lennart.l...@ericsson.com> > > Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2016 15:41:52 +0200 > > > > smf: Admin owner set needed if new handles has been created > [#2122] > > > > If not the same handles are used for creating and deleting a node > group > > (e.g. bad handle error) saImmOmAdminOwnerSet must be used to > connect the > > node group with the new admin owner > > > > > > Complete diffstat: > > ------------------ > > osaf/services/saf/smfsv/smfd/SmfUpgradeStep.cc | 103 > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------- > ------------------------- > > osaf/services/saf/smfsv/smfd/SmfUpgradeStep.hh | 5 ++- > > 2 files changed, 66 insertions(+), 42 deletions(-) > > > > > > Testing Commands: > > ----------------- > > Create a node group named as the temporary node groug used by lock > handling > > before running a single step campaign with nodes as > deactivation/activation > > units. > > > > Command for creating the node group: > > immcfg -c SaAmfNodeGroup -a saAmfNGAdminState=2 -a > saAmfNGNodeList='safAmfNode=PL-3,safAmfCluster=myAmfCluster' > safAmfNodeGroup=smfLockAdmNg1,safAmfCluster=myAmfCluster > > > > > > Testing, Expected Results: > > -------------------------- > > With patch the campaign shall complete > > > > > > Conditions of Submission: > > ------------------------- > > Push end of week after ack from reviwer > > > > > > 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. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 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
