Hi Hung, Reviewed and tested the patch. Ack from me.
Memory leak fixed in the second review file needs to be fixed in earlier OpenSAF releases. Thanks, Zoran -----Original Message----- From: Hung Nguyen [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: den 13 december 2016 04:28 To: Zoran Milinkovic <[email protected]>; [email protected] Cc: [email protected] Subject: [PATCH 0 of 3] Review Request for imm: Improve the iteration in ImmModel [#2224] Summary: imm: Improve the iteration in ImmModel [#2224] Review request for Trac Ticket(s): 2224 Peer Reviewer(s): Zoran, Neel Pull request to: Affected branch(es): 5.2 Development branch: 5.2 -------------------------------- 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): --------------------------------------------- changeset 5bc30a78e98beb7d491f4f3e878cd070e608d54c Author: Hung Nguyen <[email protected]> Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2016 18:02:56 +0700 imm: Use return from map::erase() to avoid resetting iterator to begin [#2224] Use return from map::erase() to avoid resetting iterator to begin. changeset 1b2efe4ef31a35037a68f21d628fc61e4f6d4b5d Author: Hung Nguyen <[email protected]> Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2016 18:57:55 +0700 imm: Don't reset iterator to begin when clearing a map [#2224] When removing all elements from a map, iterate through the map to free each element and then use clear() to clear the map. changeset ae81673cb4757caaedaad902e8f29cf417ae82c4 Author: Hung Nguyen <[email protected]> Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2016 19:02:07 +0700 imm: Use erase(key_type) to remove all elements with specific key [#2224] Use erase(key_type) to remove all elements with specific key. Complete diffstat: ------------------ osaf/services/saf/immsv/immnd/ImmModel.cc | 101 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------------------------------------- 1 files changed, 51 insertions(+), 50 deletions(-) Testing Commands: ----------------- Testing, Expected Results: -------------------------- 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. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Developer Access Program for Intel Xeon Phi Processors Access to Intel Xeon Phi processor-based developer platforms. With one year of Intel Parallel Studio XE. Training and support from Colfax. Order your platform today.http://sdm.link/intel _______________________________________________ Opensaf-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel
