Hi Lennart,

I am not sure if there is confusion for "logtest" and "saflogtest" with you.
I have a check the printout of help (-h) of command "saflogtest" and does
not fully understand your comments. Could you give me the example? 

Thanks
Canh

-----Original Message-----
From: Lennart Lund [mailto:lennart.l...@ericsson.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2018 6:41 PM
To: Canh Van Truong <canh.v.tru...@dektech.com.au>; Vu Minh Nguyen
<vu.m.ngu...@dektech.com.au>; srinivas.mangip...@oracle.com
Cc: opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Canh Van Truong
<canh.v.tru...@dektech.com.au>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 0/1] Review Request for log: update saflogtest to limit
timeout when handling try again [#2764]

Hi Canh

When I was testing this I saw a lot of options for logtest that are not part
of the help (-h) printout. Several of them does not even have a comment in
the code telling what they are used f or and how to use them. This must be
fixed!
For each option it must be documented:
- What the option is for
- Why this option exist. Is it for example created to enable some specific
test?
- How to use it e.g. if it some other option also have to be used
        
It must also be documented in two places!
1. In the help (-h) printout. Here a short explanation may be enough
2. Somewhere in the code or README a full explanation including usage must
be given. I suggest a "file comment" in the beginning of saflogtest.c. An
alternative could be in the switch where each option has a case

Thanks
Lennart


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Lennart Lund
> Sent: den 30 januari 2018 12:17
> To: 'Canh Van Truong' <canh.v.tru...@dektech.com.au>; Vu Minh Nguyen
> <vu.m.ngu...@dektech.com.au>; srinivas.mangip...@oracle.com
> Cc: opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Canh Van Truong
> <canh.v.tru...@dektech.com.au>
> Subject: RE: [PATCH 0/1] Review Request for log: update saflogtest to
limit
> timeout when handling try again [#2764]
> 
> Hi Canh
> 
> Ack
> Have a very minor comment, see attached .diff
> 
> Thanks
> Lennart
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Canh Van Truong [mailto:canh.v.tru...@dektech.com.au]
> > Sent: den 29 januari 2018 06:06
> > To: Lennart Lund <lennart.l...@ericsson.com>; Vu Minh Nguyen
> > <vu.m.ngu...@dektech.com.au>; srinivas.mangip...@oracle.com
> > Cc: opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Canh Van Truong
> > <canh.v.tru...@dektech.com.au>
> > Subject: [PATCH 0/1] Review Request for log: update saflogtest to limit
> > timeout when handling try again [#2764]
> >
> > Summary: log: update saflogtest to limit timeout when handling try again
> > [#2764]
> > Review request for Ticket(s): 2764
> > Peer Reviewer(s): Lennart, Vu, Srinivas
> > Pull request to: Vu
> > Affected branch(es): develop, release
> > Development branch: ticket-2764
> > Base revision: 6e7d96275a7a9e8566df8552c3e47e4e2e87552b
> > Personal repository: git://git.code.sf.net/u/canht32/review
> >
> > --------------------------------
> > 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 ***
> >
> > revision ce7dd74a0de755d7e165818d1d9f7f8e6a075f71
> > Author:     Canh Van Truong <canh.v.tru...@dektech.com.au>
> > Date:       Mon, 29 Jan 2018 11:51:48 +0700
> >
> > log: update saflogtest to limit timeout when handling try again [#2764]
> >
> > when saflogtest write log records and get error TRY_AGAIN in ack
message,
> it
> > will handle to re-write until the error is not TRY_AGAIN. There is no
limited
> > timeout
> > to handle try-again. The patch add timeout 10s for handling try-again.
> >
> >
> >
> > Complete diffstat:
> > ------------------
> >  src/log/apitest/saflogtest.c   | 86 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
> --
> > -------
> >  src/log/apitest/tet_LogOiOps.c | 48 +++++++++++------------
> >  2 files changed, 82 insertions(+), 52 deletions(-)
> >
> >
> > Testing Commands:
> > -----------------
> > *** LIST THE COMMAND LINE TOOLS/STEPS TO TEST YOUR CHANGES ***
> >
> >
> > Testing, Expected Results:
> > --------------------------
> > *** PASTE COMMAND OUTPUTS / TEST 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 ~/.gitconfig file (i.e. user.name,
user.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