Summary: smf: refactor SMF code related to CCB handling [#2892]
Review request for Ticket(s): 2892
Peer Reviewer(s): Lennart, Gary
Pull request to: *** LIST THE PERSON WITH PUSH ACCESS HERE ***
Affected branch(es): develop
Development branch: ticket-2892
Base revision: d90767dccbcc6e17b55225641bac241788c360f8
Personal repository: git://git.code.sf.net/u/winhvu/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
NOTE: Patch(es) contain lines longer than 80 characers
Comments (indicate scope for each "y" above):
---------------------------------------------
*** EXPLAIN/COMMENT THE PATCH SERIES HERE ***
revision fe6ae09d23078de388b030f9d9c4daeafd1b39b0
Author: Vu Minh Nguyen <vu.m.ngu...@dektech.com.au>
Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2018 12:54:32 +0700
smf: refactor SMF code related to CCB handling [#2892]
Do refactoring to get rid of using data converters in SMF.
The work includes 02 parts:
1) Part #1 (This patch): apply the approach to into the demo application
- testing CCB handling (test_ccbhdl.cc).
2) Part #2: apply the approach into SMF code.
Added Files:
------------
src/smf/smfd/imm_modify_config/imm_ccb_handle.cc
src/smf/smfd/imm_modify_config/imm_ccb_handle.h
src/smf/smfd/imm_om_ccapi/common/imm_cpp_type.h
Complete diffstat:
------------------
src/smf/Makefile.am | 11 +-
src/smf/smfd/imm_modify_config/imm_ccb_handle.cc | 242 +++++++++++
src/smf/smfd/imm_modify_config/imm_ccb_handle.h | 491 ++++++++++++++++++++++
src/smf/smfd/imm_modify_demo/test_ccbhdl.cc | 464 +++++---------------
src/smf/smfd/imm_om_ccapi/common/common.h | 7 +-
src/smf/smfd/imm_om_ccapi/common/imm_attribute.cc | 35 +-
src/smf/smfd/imm_om_ccapi/common/imm_attribute.h | 176 ++++----
src/smf/smfd/imm_om_ccapi/common/imm_cpp_type.h | 380 +++++++++++++++++
8 files changed, 1340 insertions(+), 466 deletions(-)
Testing Commands:
-----------------
Run the demo application `test_ccbhdl`
Testing, Expected Results:
--------------------------
All tests PASS.
Conditions of Submission:
-------------------------
Ack from peer 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
