Thanks Lennrt, I will add this note information in the .h file before push patch.
Regards Canh -----Original Message----- From: Lennart Lund <lennart.l...@ericsson.com> Sent: Monday, July 23, 2018 8:23 PM To: Canh Van Truong <canh.v.tru...@dektech.com.au>; Vu Minh Nguyen <vu.m.ngu...@dektech.com.au> Cc: opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Canh Van Truong <canh.v.tru...@dektech.com.au> Subject: RE: [PATCH 0/1] Review Request for osaf: update for saflog in case saLogWriteLogAsync with BAD_HANDLE [#2886] Hi Canh, Ack. Note 1: The function comment for the saflog() function in the .h file seems to be the only documentation for this feature. Information about that this is a shoot and forget logging handler seems to be missing. A user should be aware of that there is no guarantee that logging is actually done and there is no information if logging fail. I suggest adding this information. /Lennart > -----Original Message----- > From: Canh Van Truong <canh.v.tru...@dektech.com.au> > Sent: den 2 juli 2018 12:24 > To: Lennart Lund <lennart.l...@ericsson.com>; Vu Minh Nguyen > <vu.m.ngu...@dektech.com.au> > Cc: opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Canh Van Truong > <canh.v.tru...@dektech.com.au> > Subject: [PATCH 0/1] Review Request for osaf: update for saflog in case > saLogWriteLogAsync with BAD_HANDLE [#2886] > > Summary: osaf: update for saflog in case saLogWriteLogAsync with > BAD_HANDLE [#2886] > Review request for Ticket(s): 2886 > Peer Reviewer(s): Lennart, Vu > Pull request to: Vu > Affected branch(es): develop > Development branch: ticket-2886 > Base revision: 8ef5d4862d94e8496df3f896463d034ae9f2b065 > 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 1432d769c26c0ecc1e321f628da6c04c1fb376b9 > Author: Canh Van Truong <canh.v.tru...@dektech.com.au> > Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2018 17:05:04 +0700 > > osaf: update for saflog in case saLogWriteLogAsync with BAD_HANDLE > [#2886] > > If saLogWriteLogAsync return BAD_HANDLE error, log client will never be > re-initialized again. The patch reset variable "log_client_initialized = false" > in case BAD_HANDLE and the client will be re-initialized later. > > > > Complete diffstat: > ------------------ > src/osaf/saflog/saflog.c | 75 ++++++++++++++++-------------------------------- > 1 file changed, 25 insertions(+), 50 deletions(-) > > > Testing Commands: > ----------------- > *** LIST THE COMMAND LINE TOOLS/STEPS TO TEST YOUR CHANGES *** > > > Testing, Expected Results: > -------------------------- > *** PASTE COMMAND OUTPUTS / TEST RESULTS *** > > > Conditions of Submission: > ------------------------- > *** HOW MANY DAYS BEFORE PUSHING, CONSENSUS ETC *** > > > 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
