Summary: base: Add support to direct OpenSAF logging to local node file [#2306]
Review request for Ticket(s): 2306
Peer Reviewer(s): Anders, Hans, Ravi
Affected branch(es): develop
Development branch: ticket-2306
Base revision: aff54ff091727f27830443332b830890668749cf
Personal repository: git://

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 f7f80c0372017bb3b5b94c927e08a86adf61e286
Author: Minh Chau <>
Date:   Thu, 12 Apr 2018 09:02:46 +1000

base: Example of OSAF_LOCAL_LOG_FILE environment variable in amfd.conf file 

This commit is only an example to show where OSAF_LOCAL_LOG_FILE is
configured. This commit will not be pushed.
The introduction of OSAF_LOCAL_LOG_FILE for all services will be
in another commit.

revision 9ad63ddd3259950ab270aa9797742fbb801a6594
Author: Minh Chau <>
Date:   Thu, 12 Apr 2018 08:36:05 +1000

base: Add support to direct OpenSAF logging to local node file [#2306]

Unify TraceLog and MdsLog class to one class (TraceLog) so it can be
used as a common log client.
Add new instance TraceLog for OpenSAF logging to local file, which can
be enabled/disabled via environment variable OSAF_LOCAL_NODE_LOG

Complete diffstat:
 src/amf/amfd/amfd.conf |   6 ++
 src/base/   | 167 +++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------------
 src/base/logtrace.h    |  50 +++++++++++++--
 src/mds/     | 114 +++------------------------------
 4 files changed, 146 insertions(+), 191 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      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., 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,!
Opensaf-devel mailing list

Reply via email to