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

Reply via email to