Summary: msg: add new test case of saMsgInitialize() of apitest [#2967]
Review request for Ticket(s): 2967
Peer Reviewer(s):Alex
Pull request to: *** LIST THE PERSON WITH PUSH ACCESS HERE ***
Affected branch(es): develop
Development branch: ticket-2967
Base revision: c43ae9d97d169cc4a3b57da14ed9191dca8dfba5
Personal repository: git://git.code.sf.net/u/mohan-hasoln/review
--------------------------------
Impacted area Impact y/n
--------------------------------
Docs n
Build system n
RPM/packaging n
Configuration files n
Startup scripts n
SAF services n
OpenSAF services n
Core libraries n
Samples n
Tests y
Other n
Comments (indicate scope for each "y" above):
---------------------------------------------
*** EXPLAIN/COMMENT THE PATCH SERIES HERE ***
revision 82840e1c01ee968c7b637d8a44bfcfd45d411989
Author: Mohan Kanakam <mo...@hasolutions.in>
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2018 13:09:42 +0530
msg: add new test case of saMsgFinalize() of apitest [#2967]
revision f056121a6d56eab7bea7192dab2cffeb8ece6042
Author: Mohan Kanakam <mo...@hasolutions.in>
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2018 12:54:05 +0530
msg: add new test case of saMsgDispatch() of apitest [#2967]
revision 18067a2ade0ed6726f4235d32c897f3b1aed37e9
Author: Mohan Kanakam <mo...@hasolutions.in>
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2018 12:37:36 +0530
msg: add new test case of saMsgSelectionObjectGet() of apitest [#2967]
revision 7cdb6198214cc16bde1c52a83ca0d2730715ab3d
Author: Mohan Kanakam <mo...@hasolutions.in>
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2018 12:08:40 +0530
msg: add new test case of saMsgInitialize() of apitest [#2967]
Complete diffstat:
------------------
src/msg/apitest/tet_mqa.c | 46 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
src/msg/apitest/tet_mqa_conf.c | 8 +++++++
src/msg/apitest/tet_mqsv.h | 6 ++++++
src/msg/apitest/tet_mqsv_util.c | 15 ++++++++++++++
4 files changed, 75 insertions(+)
Testing Commands:
-----------------
./msgtest
Testing, Expected Results:
--------------------------
11 PASSED with NULL message handle,NULL callbacks,NULL version
5 PASSED with NULL Selection object and uninitialized message handle
10 PASSED with invalid message handle and invalid flags
7 PASSED 7 PASSED Fianlize the NULL callback structure handle
Conditions of Submission:
-------------------------
Ack from maintainers
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.
_______________________________________________
Opensaf-devel mailing list
Opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel
