Hi Canh, Yes I may have mixed up saflogtest and logtest. I am sorry if that's the case. In any case the comment about the help printout and options is not a remark on this fix. It was based on a finding for something that should be handled in a separate ticket. But as you mention I may have mixed up things here that makes my comment about the options invalid.
Thanks Lennart > -----Original Message----- > From: Canh Van Truong [mailto:canh.v.tru...@dektech.com.au] > Sent: den 2 februari 2018 09:28 > 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 > Subject: RE: [PATCH 0/1] Review Request for log: update saflogtest to limit > timeout when handling try again [#2764] > > 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
