Hi Lennart

 

I updated your comment. And sent for new version

 

while (!osaf_is_timeout(&timeout_time)) {

//[Lennart] Avoid using "while (!osaf_is_timeout(&timeout_time))""
constructions

// instead use "while (osaf_is_timeout(&timeout_time) == false)"

// The reason is for documentation purpose. Faster and easier to read.

[Canh] Done

 

char command1[MAX_DATA], command2[MAX_DATA];

// [Lennart] Why not give each command a descriptive name?

// Also each command should have its own variable. Anonymous

// variables that change meaning makes the code unnessecary hard to

[Canh] Done

 

 

// [Lennart] This command does not count the number of log/cfg files

// but I don't know exactly what this command is actually doing (hard to
analyze).

// Give this command a descriptive name as in example above and if that is
not

// enough then also wright a comment that describes what it is actually
doing.

                sprintf(command1, "find %s -type f -mmin -1 "

                                                  "| egrep
'%s.*\\.[log$\\|cfg$]' "

                                                  "| wc -l | awk '{printf
$1}'",

                                                  log_root_path,
"verRotatedFile");

 

[Canh] This command counts number of cfg and log files. I update the
description:

+             // Find cfg/log files and count number of files

+             // Step 1: Find all that files's data were last modified 1
minutes ago

+             // Step 2: Filter all 'verRotatedFile*.log' and
'verRotatedFile*.cfg'

+             // Step 3: Count number of files at step 2

+             char count_number_of_log_cfg_files[MAX_DATA];

+             sprintf(count_number_of_log_cfg_files,

+                             "find %s -type f -mmin -1 "

+                             "| egrep '%s.*\\.[log$\\|cfg$]' "

+                             "| wc -l | awk '{printf $1}'",

+                             log_root_path, "verRotatedFile");

 

(find /srv/shared/saflog -type f -mmin -1 | egrep
'verRotatedFile.*\.[log$\|cfg$]' | wc -l | awk '{printf $1}')

 

Regards

Canh

 

 

 

From: Lennart Lund <lennart.l...@ericsson.com> 
Sent: Friday, June 28, 2019 10:26 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
Subject: Sv: [PATCH 0/1] Review Request for log: Update the try again for
admin operation [#3056]

 

Hi Canh,

 

See comments tagged [Lennart] in the attached file.

 

Thanks

Lennart

 

  _____  

Från: Canh Van Truong <canh.v.tru...@dektech.com.au
<mailto:canh.v.tru...@dektech.com.au> >
Skickat: den 27 juni 2019 09:20
Till: Lennart Lund; Vu Minh Nguyen
Kopia: opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
<mailto:opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net> ; Canh Van Truong
Ämne: [PATCH 0/1] Review Request for log: Update the try again for admin
operation [#3056] 

 

Summary: log: Update the try again for admin operation [#3056]
Review request for Ticket(s): 3056
Peer Reviewer(s): Vu, Lennart
Pull request to: *** LIST THE PERSON WITH PUSH ACCESS HERE ***
Affected branch(es): develop
Development branch: ticket-3056
Base revision: 97e375ff571bbdb163e6846b90e2f2da58394cbb
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            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 7659200d2bd20d96d0dbfff6f583be478f9a6429
Author: Canh Van Truong <canh.v.tru...@dektech.com.au
<mailto:canh.v.tru...@dektech.com.au> >
Date:   Thu, 27 Jun 2019 13:19:48 +0700

log: Update the try again for admin operation [#3056]

The logtest 6 49 and logtest 6 50 failed because the admin
operation fail due to closing log file timeout.

Update to try again the command admin operation in test cases



Complete diffstat:
------------------
 src/log/apitest/tet_LogOiOps.c | 54
++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------
 1 file changed, 34 insertions(+), 20 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.


_______________________________________________
Opensaf-devel mailing list
Opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel

Reply via email to