Summary: cpnd: Correct duration of cpnd_tmr_start in cpnd_proc_update_remote 
[#2787]
Review request for Ticket(s): 2787
Peer Reviewer(s): Ravi Sekhar, Alex Jones
Pull request to: Ravi Sekhar, Alex Jones
Affected branch(es): develop, release
Development branch: ticket-2787
Base revision: 0f8729c98c653e6a41c0077132b222c64e196a79
Personal repository: git://git.code.sf.net/u/xhoalee/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):
---------------------------------------------

revision c3319ae5d97597b10ab4db566f50e79ed2de71d6
Author: Hoa Le <hoa...@dektech.com.au>
Date:   Fri, 23 Feb 2018 11:19:05 +0700

cpnd: Correct duration of cpnd_tmr_start in cpnd_proc_update_remote [#2787]

In cpnd_proc_update_remote() function, cpnd_tmr_start is invoked with the
timer duration parameter being adjusted by m_CPSV_CONVERT_SATIME_TEN_MILLI_SEC.
This duration is 0 in most cases, which will lead to SA_AIS_ERR_TIMEOUT error
of checkpoint write action if the checkpoint data is big enough.

This patch corrects the duration of cpnd_tmr_start in cpnd_proc_update_remote.


Complete diffstat:
------------------
 src/ckpt/ckptnd/cpnd_proc.c | 4 +---
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-)


Testing Commands:
-----------------
- Open a checkpoint with maxSections=1 and maxSectionsize=512*1000000
- Create a new checkpoint section
- Call saCkptSectionOverwrite to overwrite the previous section with
a big dataBuffer ('a'*10000000)


Testing, Expected Results:
--------------------------
- saCkptSectionOverwrite should not result in SA_AIS_ERR_TIMEOUT


Conditions of Submission:
-------------------------
ACK from reviewer


Arch      Built     Started    Linux distro
-------------------------------------------
mips        n          n
mips64      n          n
x86         n          n
x86_64      y          y
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