Re: [devel] [PATCH 2/3] imm: add new test case of API saImmOmClassDescriptionGet_2() of apitest [#2951]
Hi Mohan,
Ack with a minor comment. Thanks.
Regards, Vu
> -Original Message-
> From: Mohan Kanakam
> Sent: Friday, November 2, 2018 2:08 PM
> To: vu.m.ngu...@dektech.com.au; hans.nordeb...@ericsson.com
> Cc: opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Mohan Kanakam
>
> Subject: [PATCH 2/3] imm: add new test case of API
> saImmOmClassDescriptionGet_2() of apitest [#2951]
>
> ---
> .../apitest/management/test_saImmOmClassCreate_2.c | 3 +++
> .../management/test_saImmOmClassDescriptionGet_2.c | 25
> ++
> 2 files changed, 28 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/src/imm/apitest/management/test_saImmOmClassCreate_2.c
> b/src/imm/apitest/management/test_saImmOmClassCreate_2.c
> index 9afbbe7..ea4db45 100644
> --- a/src/imm/apitest/management/test_saImmOmClassCreate_2.c
> +++ b/src/imm/apitest/management/test_saImmOmClassCreate_2.c
> @@ -1509,6 +1509,7 @@ extern void
> saImmOmClassDescriptionGet_2_02(void);
> extern void saImmOmClassDescriptionGet_2_03(void);
> extern void saImmOmClassDescriptionGet_2_04(void);
> extern void saImmOmClassDescriptionGet_2_05(void);
> +extern void saImmOmClassDescriptionGet_2_06(void);
> extern void saImmOmClassDescriptionMemoryFree_2_01(void);
> extern void saImmOmClassDescriptionMemoryFree_2_02(void);
>
> @@ -1604,6 +1605,8 @@ __attribute__((constructor)) static void
> saImmOmInitialize_constructor(void)
> test_case_add(
> 2, saImmOmClassDescriptionGet_2_05,
> "saImmOmClassDescriptionGet_2 - SA_AIS_OK, Fetch includes
> SA_IMM_ATTR_NO_DANGLING");
> + test_case_add(2, saImmOmClassDescriptionGet_2_06,
> + "saImmOmClassDescriptionGet_2 -
> SA_AIS_ERR_INVALID_PARAM");
[Vu] Lack of test slogan. A suggestion "Get class descriptor of an invalid
class name".
>
> test_case_add(2, saImmOmClassDescriptionMemoryFree_2_01,
> "saImmOmClassDescriptionMemoryFree_2 - SA_AIS_OK");
> diff --git
> a/src/imm/apitest/management/test_saImmOmClassDescriptionGet_2.c
> b/src/imm/apitest/management/test_saImmOmClassDescriptionGet_2.c
> index ecf7ceb..bada265 100644
> --- a/src/imm/apitest/management/test_saImmOmClassDescriptionGet_2.c
> +++ b/src/imm/apitest/management/test_saImmOmClassDescriptionGet_2.c
> @@ -175,3 +175,28 @@ void saImmOmClassDescriptionGet_2_05(void)
> safassert(immutil_saImmOmClassDelete(immOmHandle, className),
> SA_AIS_OK);
> safassert(immutil_saImmOmFinalize(immOmHandle), SA_AIS_OK);
> }
> +
> +void saImmOmClassDescriptionGet_2_06(void)
> +{
> + const SaImmClassNameT className = (SaImmClassNameT)
> __FUNCTION__;
> + SaImmAttrDefinitionT_2 attr1 = {
> + "rdn", SA_IMM_ATTR_SANAMET,
> + SA_IMM_ATTR_RUNTIME | SA_IMM_ATTR_RDN |
> SA_IMM_ATTR_CACHED, NULL};
> + const SaImmAttrDefinitionT_2 *attrDefinitionsIn[] = {, NULL};
> + SaImmClassCategoryT classCategory;
> + SaImmAttrDefinitionT_2 **attrDefinitionsOut;
> +
> + safassert(immutil_saImmOmInitialize(,
> , ),
> + SA_AIS_OK);
> + safassert(immutil_saImmOmClassCreate_2(immOmHandle,
> className,
> +SA_IMM_CLASS_RUNTIME,
> attrDefinitionsIn),
> + SA_AIS_OK);
> + rc = immutil_saImmOmClassDescriptionGet_2(immOmHandle, NULL,
> + ,
);
> + test_validate(rc, SA_AIS_ERR_INVALID_PARAM);
> +
> safassert(immutil_saImmOmClassDescriptionMemoryFree_2(immOm
> Handle,
> + attrDefinitionsOut),
> + SA_AIS_OK);
> + safassert(immutil_saImmOmClassDelete(immOmHandle, className),
> SA_AIS_OK);
> + safassert(immutil_saImmOmFinalize(immOmHandle), SA_AIS_OK);
> +}
> --
> 2.7.4
___
Opensaf-devel mailing list
Opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel
Re: [devel] [PATCH 3/3] imm: add new test case of API saImmOmClassDelete() of apitest [#2951]
Hi Mohan,
Ack with minor comments.
Regards, Vu
> -Original Message-
> From: Mohan Kanakam
> Sent: Friday, November 2, 2018 2:08 PM
> To: vu.m.ngu...@dektech.com.au; hans.nordeb...@ericsson.com
> Cc: opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Mohan Kanakam
>
> Subject: [PATCH 3/3] imm: add new test case of API saImmOmClassDelete()
> of apitest [#2951]
>
> ---
> .../apitest/management/test_saImmOmClassCreate_2.c| 4
> src/imm/apitest/management/test_saImmOmClassDelete.c | 19
> +++
> 2 files changed, 23 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/src/imm/apitest/management/test_saImmOmClassCreate_2.c
> b/src/imm/apitest/management/test_saImmOmClassCreate_2.c
> index ea4db45..d8810e9 100644
> --- a/src/imm/apitest/management/test_saImmOmClassCreate_2.c
> +++ b/src/imm/apitest/management/test_saImmOmClassCreate_2.c
> @@ -1517,6 +1517,7 @@ extern void saImmOmClassDelete_2_01(void);
> extern void saImmOmClassDelete_2_02(void);
> extern void saImmOmClassDelete_2_03(void);
> extern void saImmOmClassDelete_2_04(void);
> +extern void saImmOmClassDelete_2_05(void);
>
> __attribute__((constructor)) static void
saImmOmInitialize_constructor(void)
> {
> @@ -1627,6 +1628,9 @@ __attribute__((constructor)) static void
> saImmOmInitialize_constructor(void)
> test_case_add(
> 2, saImmOmClassDelete_2_04,
> "saImmOmClassDelete_2 - SA_AIS_ERR_INVALID_PARAM, Empty
> classname");
> + test_case_add(
> + 2, saImmOmClassDelete_2_05,
> + "saImmOmClassDelete_2 - SA_AIS_ERR_NOT_EXIST ");
[Vu] Please add a slogan for this test case. A suggestion "Double delete a
class name"
>
> test_case_add(
> 2, saImmOmClassCreate_SchemaChange_2_01,
> diff --git a/src/imm/apitest/management/test_saImmOmClassDelete.c
> b/src/imm/apitest/management/test_saImmOmClassDelete.c
> index 273d192..ad36b8f 100644
> --- a/src/imm/apitest/management/test_saImmOmClassDelete.c
> +++ b/src/imm/apitest/management/test_saImmOmClassDelete.c
> @@ -76,3 +76,22 @@ void saImmOmClassDelete_2_04(void)
> test_validate(rc, SA_AIS_ERR_INVALID_PARAM);
> safassert(immutil_saImmOmFinalize(immOmHandle), SA_AIS_OK);
> }
> +
> +void saImmOmClassDelete_2_05(void)
> +{
> + const SaImmClassNameT className = (SaImmClassNameT)
> __FUNCTION__;
> + SaImmAttrDefinitionT_2 attr1 = {"rdn", SA_IMM_ATTR_SANAMET,
> + SA_IMM_ATTR_CONFIG |
> SA_IMM_ATTR_RDN,
> + NULL};
> + const SaImmAttrDefinitionT_2 *attrDefinitions[] = {, NULL};
> +
> + safassert(immutil_saImmOmInitialize(,
> , ),
> + SA_AIS_OK);
> + safassert(immutil_saImmOmClassCreate_2(immOmHandle,
> className,
> +SA_IMM_CLASS_CONFIG,
attrDefinitions),
> + SA_AIS_OK);
> + immutil_saImmOmClassDelete(immOmHandle, className);
[Vu] Should add an assertion for the first delete to make sure the class has
been successfully deleted.
> + rc = immutil_saImmOmClassDelete(immOmHandle, className);
> + test_validate(rc, SA_AIS_ERR_NOT_EXIST);
> + safassert(immutil_saImmOmFinalize(immOmHandle), SA_AIS_OK);
> +}
> --
> 2.7.4
___
Opensaf-devel mailing list
Opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel
Re: [devel] [PATCH 1/3] imm: add new test cases of API saImmOmClassCreate_2() of apitest [#2951]
Hi Mohan,
Ack with minor comments.
Regards, Vu
> -Original Message-
> From: Mohan Kanakam
> Sent: Friday, November 2, 2018 2:08 PM
> To: vu.m.ngu...@dektech.com.au; hans.nordeb...@ericsson.com
> Cc: opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Mohan Kanakam
>
> Subject: [PATCH 1/3] imm: add new test cases of API
> saImmOmClassCreate_2() of apitest [#2951]
>
> ---
> .../apitest/management/test_saImmOmClassCreate_2.c | 85
> ++
> 1 file changed, 85 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/src/imm/apitest/management/test_saImmOmClassCreate_2.c
> b/src/imm/apitest/management/test_saImmOmClassCreate_2.c
> index 4f25f8b..9afbbe7 100644
> --- a/src/imm/apitest/management/test_saImmOmClassCreate_2.c
> +++ b/src/imm/apitest/management/test_saImmOmClassCreate_2.c
> @@ -426,6 +426,80 @@ void saImmOmClassCreate_2_19(void)
> safassert(immutil_saImmOmFinalize(immOmHandle), SA_AIS_OK);
> }
>
> +void saImmOmClassCreate_2_20(void)
> +{
> + const SaImmClassNameT className = (SaImmClassNameT)
> __FUNCTION__;
> + SaImmAttrDefinitionT_2 attr1 = {"rdn", SA_IMM_ATTR_SANAMET,
> + SA_IMM_ATTR_CONFIG |
> SA_IMM_ATTR_RDN,
> + NULL};
> + const SaImmAttrDefinitionT_2 *attrDefinitions[] = {, NULL};
> +
> + safassert(immutil_saImmOmInitialize(,
> , ),
> + SA_AIS_OK);
> + rc = immutil_saImmOmClassCreate_2(-1, className,
> SA_IMM_CLASS_CONFIG,
> + attrDefinitions);
> + test_validate(rc, SA_AIS_ERR_BAD_HANDLE);
> + safassert(immutil_saImmOmFinalize(immOmHandle), SA_AIS_OK);
> +}
> +
> +void saImmOmClassCreate_2_21(void)
> +{
> + const SaImmClassNameT className = (SaImmClassNameT)
> __FUNCTION__;
> + SaImmAttrDefinitionT_2 attr1 = {"rdn", SA_IMM_ATTR_SANAMET,
> + SA_IMM_ATTR_CONFIG |
> SA_IMM_ATTR_RDN,
> + NULL};
> + const SaImmAttrDefinitionT_2 *attrDefinitions[] = {, NULL};
> +
> + rc = immutil_saImmOmClassCreate_2(immOmHandle, className,
> SA_IMM_CLASS_CONFIG,
> + attrDefinitions);
> + test_validate(rc, SA_AIS_ERR_BAD_HANDLE);
> +}
> +
> +void saImmOmClassCreate_2_22(void)
> +{
> + const SaImmClassNameT className = (SaImmClassNameT)
> __FUNCTION__;
> + SaImmAttrDefinitionT_2 attr1 = {
> + "rdn", SA_IMM_ATTR_SANAMET,
> + SA_IMM_ATTR_RUNTIME | SA_IMM_ATTR_RDN |
> SA_IMM_ATTR_CACHED, NULL};
> + const SaImmAttrDefinitionT_2 *attrDefinitions[] = {, NULL};
> +
> + rc = immutil_saImmOmClassCreate_2(immOmHandle, className,
> SA_IMM_CLASS_RUNTIME,
> + attrDefinitions);
> + test_validate(rc, SA_AIS_ERR_BAD_HANDLE);
> +}
> +
> +void saImmOmClassCreate_2_23(void)
> +{
> + const SaImmClassNameT className = (SaImmClassNameT)
> __FUNCTION__;
> + SaImmAttrDefinitionT_2 attr1 = {"rdn", SA_IMM_ATTR_SANAMET,
> + SA_IMM_ATTR_CONFIG |
> SA_IMM_ATTR_RDN,
> + NULL};
> + const SaImmAttrDefinitionT_2 *attrDefinitions[] = {, NULL};
> +
> + safassert(immutil_saImmOmInitialize(,
> , ),
> + SA_AIS_OK);
> + immutil_saImmOmFinalize(immOmHandle);
> + rc = immutil_saImmOmClassCreate_2(immOmHandle, className,
> SA_IMM_CLASS_CONFIG,
> + attrDefinitions);
> + test_validate(rc, SA_AIS_ERR_BAD_HANDLE);
> +}
> +
> +void saImmOmClassCreate_2_24(void)
> +{
> + const SaImmClassNameT className = (SaImmClassNameT)
> __FUNCTION__;
> + SaImmAttrDefinitionT_2 attr1 = {
> + "rdn", SA_IMM_ATTR_SANAMET,
> + SA_IMM_ATTR_RUNTIME | SA_IMM_ATTR_RDN |
> SA_IMM_ATTR_CACHED, NULL};
> + const SaImmAttrDefinitionT_2 *attrDefinitions[] = {, NULL};
> +
> + safassert(immutil_saImmOmInitialize(,
> , ),
> + SA_AIS_OK);
> + immutil_saImmOmFinalize(immOmHandle);
> + rc = immutil_saImmOmClassCreate_2(immOmHandle, className,
> SA_IMM_CLASS_RUNTIME,
> + attrDefinitions);
> + test_validate(rc, SA_AIS_ERR_BAD_HANDLE);
> +}
> +
> /*
>Verify it is not allowed to create IMM object class with reserved name.
>NOTE: As the list of reserved class names is read from the environment
> @@ -1497,6 +1571,17 @@ __attribute__((constructor)) static void
> saImmOmInitialize_constructor(void)
> test_case_add(
> 2, saImmOmClassCreate_2_19,
> "saImmOmClassCreate_2 - SA_AIS_OK, Create a class that has
> STRONG_DEFAULT flag without having default value");
> + test_case_add(2, saImmOmClassCreate_2_20,
> + "saImmOmClassCreate_2 - SA_AIS_ERR_BAD_HANDLE
> CONFIG CLASS");
[Vu] Use lowercase for test slogans to align with existing ones and the
slogan for this test case seems not relevant. A suggestion "create config
class with invalid handle".
> + test_case_add(2, saImmOmClassCreate_2_21,
> +
Re: [devel] [PATCH 2/3] imm: add new test case of API saImmOmDispatch() of apitest [#2951]
Hi Mohan,
Ack for this patch with a minor comment. Thanks.
Regards, Vu
> -Original Message-
> From: Mohan Kanakam
> Sent: Thursday, November 1, 2018 3:28 PM
> To: vu.m.ngu...@dektech.com.au; hans.nordeb...@ericsson.com
> Cc: opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Mohan Kanakam
>
> Subject: [PATCH 2/3] imm: add new test case of API saImmOmDispatch() of
> apitest [#2951]
>
> ---
> src/imm/apitest/management/test_saImmOmDispatch.c | 72
> ++
> .../apitest/management/test_saImmOmInitialize.c| 35 +++
> 2 files changed, 107 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/src/imm/apitest/management/test_saImmOmDispatch.c
> b/src/imm/apitest/management/test_saImmOmDispatch.c
> index 3648a95..0ab9885 100644
> --- a/src/imm/apitest/management/test_saImmOmDispatch.c
> +++ b/src/imm/apitest/management/test_saImmOmDispatch.c
> @@ -52,3 +52,75 @@ void saImmOmDispatch_04(void)
> test_validate(rc, SA_AIS_ERR_INVALID_PARAM);
> safassert(immutil_saImmOmFinalize(immOmHandle), SA_AIS_OK);
> }
> +
> +void saImmOmDispatch_05(void)
> +{
> + rc = saImmOmDispatch(immOmHandle, SA_DISPATCH_ONE);
> + test_validate(rc, SA_AIS_ERR_BAD_HANDLE);
> +}
> +
> +void saImmOmDispatch_06(void)
> +{
> + safassert(immutil_saImmOmInitialize(,
> , ),
> + SA_AIS_OK);
> + immutil_saImmOmFinalize(immOmHandle);
> + rc = saImmOmDispatch(immOmHandle, SA_DISPATCH_ONE);
> + test_validate(rc, SA_AIS_ERR_BAD_HANDLE);
> +}
> +
> +void saImmOmDispatch_07(void)
> +{
> + safassert(immutil_saImmOmInitialize(,
> , ),
> + SA_AIS_OK);
> + rc = saImmOmDispatch(immOmHandle, SA_DISPATCH_BLOCKING);
> + test_validate(rc, SA_AIS_OK);
> + safassert(immutil_saImmOmFinalize(immOmHandle), SA_AIS_OK);
> +}
> +
> +void saImmOmDispatch_08(void)
> +{
> + safassert(immutil_saImmOmInitialize(,
> , ),
> + SA_AIS_OK);
> + rc = saImmOmDispatch(-1, SA_DISPATCH_ALL);
> + test_validate(rc, SA_AIS_ERR_BAD_HANDLE);
> + safassert(immutil_saImmOmFinalize(immOmHandle), SA_AIS_OK);
> +}
> +
> +void saImmOmDispatch_09(void)
> +{
> + rc = saImmOmDispatch(immOmHandle, SA_DISPATCH_ALL);
> + test_validate(rc, SA_AIS_ERR_BAD_HANDLE);
> +}
> +
> +void saImmOmDispatch_10(void)
> +{
> + safassert(immutil_saImmOmInitialize(,
> , ),
> + SA_AIS_OK);
> + immutil_saImmOmFinalize(immOmHandle);
> + rc = saImmOmDispatch(immOmHandle, SA_DISPATCH_ALL);
> + test_validate(rc, SA_AIS_ERR_BAD_HANDLE);
> +}
> +
> +void saImmOmDispatch_11(void)
> +{
> + safassert(immutil_saImmOmInitialize(,
> , ),
> + SA_AIS_OK);
> + rc = saImmOmDispatch(-1, SA_DISPATCH_BLOCKING);
> + test_validate(rc, SA_AIS_ERR_BAD_HANDLE);
> + safassert(immutil_saImmOmFinalize(immOmHandle), SA_AIS_OK);
> +}
> +
> +void saImmOmDispatch_12(void)
> +{
> + rc = saImmOmDispatch(immOmHandle, SA_DISPATCH_BLOCKING);
> + test_validate(rc, SA_AIS_ERR_BAD_HANDLE);
> +}
> +
> +void saImmOmDispatch_13(void)
> +{
> + safassert(immutil_saImmOmInitialize(,
> , ),
> + SA_AIS_OK);
> + immutil_saImmOmFinalize(immOmHandle);
> + rc = saImmOmDispatch(immOmHandle, SA_DISPATCH_BLOCKING);
> + test_validate(rc, SA_AIS_ERR_BAD_HANDLE);
> +}
> diff --git a/src/imm/apitest/management/test_saImmOmInitialize.c
> b/src/imm/apitest/management/test_saImmOmInitialize.c
> index 2dca5da..b17ab86 100644
> --- a/src/imm/apitest/management/test_saImmOmInitialize.c
> +++ b/src/imm/apitest/management/test_saImmOmInitialize.c
> @@ -309,6 +309,15 @@ extern void saImmOmDispatch_01(void);
> extern void saImmOmDispatch_02(void);
> extern void saImmOmDispatch_03(void);
> extern void saImmOmDispatch_04(void);
> +extern void saImmOmDispatch_05(void);
> +extern void saImmOmDispatch_06(void);
> +extern void saImmOmDispatch_07(void);
> +extern void saImmOmDispatch_08(void);
> +extern void saImmOmDispatch_09(void);
> +extern void saImmOmDispatch_10(void);
> +extern void saImmOmDispatch_11(void);
> +extern void saImmOmDispatch_12(void);
> +extern void saImmOmDispatch_13(void);
> extern void saImmOmFinalize_01(void);
> extern void saImmOmFinalize_02(void);
> extern void saImmOmThreadInterference_01(void);
> @@ -369,6 +378,32 @@ __attribute__((constructor)) static void
> saImmOmInitialize_constructor(void)
> test_case_add(
> 1, saImmOmDispatch_04,
> "saImmOmDispatch - SA_AIS_ERR_INVALID_PARAM - invalid
> dispatchFlags");
> + test_case_add(
> + 1, saImmOmDispatch_05,
> + "saImmOmDispatch - SA_AIS_ERR_BAD_HANDLE - uninitilized
> handle SA_DISPATCH_ONE");
[Vu] Typo uninitilized? Also check it in following printouts.
> + test_case_add(
> + 1, saImmOmDispatch_06,
> + "saImmOmDispatch - SA_AIS_ERR_BAD_HANDLE - finalized handle
> SA_DISPATCH_ONE");
> + test_case_add(1, saImmOmDispatch_07,
> + "saImmOmDispatch - SA_AIS_OK
> SA_DISPATCH_BLOCKING");
> + test_case_add(
> +
Re: [devel] [PATCH 1/3] imm: add new test cases of API saImmOmSelectionObjectGet() of apitest [#2951]
Hi Mohan,
Ack for this patch with a minor comment.
Regards, Vu
> -Original Message-
> From: Mohan Kanakam
> Sent: Thursday, November 1, 2018 3:28 PM
> To: vu.m.ngu...@dektech.com.au; hans.nordeb...@ericsson.com
> Cc: opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Mohan Kanakam
>
> Subject: [PATCH 1/3] imm: add new test cases of API
> saImmOmSelectionObjectGet() of apitest [#2951]
>
> ---
> src/imm/apitest/management/test_saImmOmInitialize.c | 8
> .../apitest/management/test_saImmOmSelectionObjectGet.c | 15
> +++
> 2 files changed, 23 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/src/imm/apitest/management/test_saImmOmInitialize.c
> b/src/imm/apitest/management/test_saImmOmInitialize.c
> index 9dcfe7a..2dca5da 100644
> --- a/src/imm/apitest/management/test_saImmOmInitialize.c
> +++ b/src/imm/apitest/management/test_saImmOmInitialize.c
> @@ -303,6 +303,8 @@ void saImmOmInitialize_11(void)
>
> extern void saImmOmSelectionObjectGet_01(void);
> extern void saImmOmSelectionObjectGet_02(void);
> +extern void saImmOmSelectionObjectGet_03(void);
> +extern void saImmOmSelectionObjectGet_04(void);
> extern void saImmOmDispatch_01(void);
> extern void saImmOmDispatch_02(void);
> extern void saImmOmDispatch_03(void);
> @@ -350,6 +352,12 @@ __attribute__((constructor)) static void
> saImmOmInitialize_constructor(void)
> test_case_add(
> 1, saImmOmSelectionObjectGet_02,
> "saImmOmSelectionObjectGet - SA_AIS_ERR_BAD_HANDLE - invalid
> handle");
> + test_case_add(
> + 1, saImmOmSelectionObjectGet_03,
> + "saImmOmSelectionObjectGet - SA_AIS_ERR_BAD_HANDLE -
> uninitlized handle");
[Vu] Typo "uninitlized" ?
> + test_case_add(
> + 1, saImmOmSelectionObjectGet_04,
> + "saImmOmSelectionObjectGet - SA_AIS_ERR_BAD_HANDLE -
> finalized handle");
>
> test_case_add(1, saImmOmDispatch_01,
> "saImmOmDispatch - SA_AIS_OK SA_DISPATCH_ALL");
> diff --git
> a/src/imm/apitest/management/test_saImmOmSelectionObjectGet.c
> b/src/imm/apitest/management/test_saImmOmSelectionObjectGet.c
> index 017fd70..75b8b86 100644
> --- a/src/imm/apitest/management/test_saImmOmSelectionObjectGet.c
> +++ b/src/imm/apitest/management/test_saImmOmSelectionObjectGet.c
> @@ -35,3 +35,18 @@ void saImmOmSelectionObjectGet_02(void)
> test_validate(rc, SA_AIS_ERR_BAD_HANDLE);
> safassert(immutil_saImmOmFinalize(immOmHandle), SA_AIS_OK);
> }
> +
> +void saImmOmSelectionObjectGet_03(void)
> +{
> + rc = immutil_saImmOmSelectionObjectGet(immOmHandle,
> );
> + test_validate(rc, SA_AIS_ERR_BAD_HANDLE);
> +}
> +
> +void saImmOmSelectionObjectGet_04(void)
> +{
> + safassert(immutil_saImmOmInitialize(,
> , ),
> + SA_AIS_OK);
> + immutil_saImmOmFinalize(immOmHandle);
> + rc = immutil_saImmOmSelectionObjectGet(immOmHandle,
> );
> + test_validate(rc, SA_AIS_ERR_BAD_HANDLE);
> +}
> --
> 2.7.4
___
Opensaf-devel mailing list
Opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel
Re: [devel] [PATCH 3/3] imm: add new test case of API saImmOmFinalize() of apitest [#2951]
Hi Mohan,
Ack for this patch.
Thanks.
Regards, Vu
> -Original Message-
> From: Mohan Kanakam
> Sent: Thursday, November 1, 2018 3:28 PM
> To: vu.m.ngu...@dektech.com.au; hans.nordeb...@ericsson.com
> Cc: opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Mohan Kanakam
>
> Subject: [PATCH 3/3] imm: add new test case of API saImmOmFinalize() of
> apitest [#2951]
>
> ---
> src/imm/apitest/management/test_saImmOmFinalize.c | 15
> +++
> src/imm/apitest/management/test_saImmOmInitialize.c | 8
> 2 files changed, 23 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/src/imm/apitest/management/test_saImmOmFinalize.c
> b/src/imm/apitest/management/test_saImmOmFinalize.c
> index 1c60657..02238a8 100644
> --- a/src/imm/apitest/management/test_saImmOmFinalize.c
> +++ b/src/imm/apitest/management/test_saImmOmFinalize.c
> @@ -33,3 +33,18 @@ void saImmOmFinalize_02(void)
> test_validate(rc, SA_AIS_ERR_BAD_HANDLE);
> safassert(immutil_saImmOmFinalize(immOmHandle), SA_AIS_OK);
> }
> +
> +void saImmOmFinalize_03(void)
> +{
> + safassert(immutil_saImmOmInitialize(,
> , ),
> + SA_AIS_OK);
> + rc = immutil_saImmOmFinalize(immOmHandle);
> + rc = immutil_saImmOmFinalize(immOmHandle);
> + test_validate(rc, SA_AIS_ERR_BAD_HANDLE);
> +}
> +
> +void saImmOmFinalize_04(void)
> +{
> + rc = immutil_saImmOmFinalize(immOmHandle);
> + test_validate(rc, SA_AIS_ERR_BAD_HANDLE);
> +}
> diff --git a/src/imm/apitest/management/test_saImmOmInitialize.c
> b/src/imm/apitest/management/test_saImmOmInitialize.c
> index b17ab86..84b6cf2 100644
> --- a/src/imm/apitest/management/test_saImmOmInitialize.c
> +++ b/src/imm/apitest/management/test_saImmOmInitialize.c
> @@ -320,6 +320,8 @@ extern void saImmOmDispatch_12(void);
> extern void saImmOmDispatch_13(void);
> extern void saImmOmFinalize_01(void);
> extern void saImmOmFinalize_02(void);
> +extern void saImmOmFinalize_03(void);
> +extern void saImmOmFinalize_04(void);
> extern void saImmOmThreadInterference_01(void);
>
> __attribute__((constructor)) static void
saImmOmInitialize_constructor(void)
> @@ -409,6 +411,12 @@ __attribute__((constructor)) static void
> saImmOmInitialize_constructor(void)
> test_case_add(
> 1, saImmOmFinalize_02,
> "saImmOmFinalize - SA_AIS_ERR_BAD_HANDLE - invalid handle");
> + test_case_add(
> + 1, saImmOmFinalize_03,
> + "saImmOmFinalize - SA_AIS_ERR_BAD_HANDLE - finalized handle");
> + test_case_add(
> + 1, saImmOmFinalize_04,
> + "saImmOmFinalize - SA_AIS_ERR_BAD_HANDLE - uninitlized
> handle");
>
> test_case_add(
> 1, saImmOmThreadInterference_01,
> --
> 2.7.4
___
Opensaf-devel mailing list
Opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel
Re: [devel] [PATCH 0/5] Review Request for clm: add new test cases in clm apitest [#2914]
Hi Hans, polite reminder for review. Thanks Mohan High Availability Solutions Pvt. Ltd. www.hasolutions.in - Original Message - Subject: RE: [PATCH 0/5] Review Request for clm: add new test cases in clm apitest [#2914] From: mo...@hasolutions.in Date: 11/15/18 5:36 pm To: hans.nordeb...@ericsson.com, anders.wid...@ericsson.com, ravisekhar.ko...@oracle.com Cc: opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, "Mohan Kanakam" Hi Hans, polite reminder for review. Thanks Mohan High Availability Solutions Pvt. Ltd. www.hasolutions.in - Original Message - Subject: [PATCH 0/5] Review Request for clm: add new test cases in clm apitest [#2914] From: "Mohan Kanakam" Date: 11/6/18 1:23 pm To: hans.nordeb...@ericsson.com, anders.wid...@ericsson.com, ravisekhar.ko...@oracle.com Cc: opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, "Mohan Kanakam" Summary: clm: add new test case of API saClmInitialize() of apitest [#2914] Review request for Ticket(s): 2914 Peer Reviewer(s):Anders, Hans, Ravi Pull request to: *** LIST THE PERSON WITH PUSH ACCESS HERE *** Affected branch(es): develop Development branch: ticket-2914 Base revision: f8a6848a1cdbff0b518c3db951e4689e260226c7 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 NOTE: Patch(es) contain lines longer than 80 characers Comments (indicate scope for each "y" above): - *** EXPLAIN/COMMENT THE PATCH SERIES HERE *** revision 7b500ebca4037bcf3d55a2112b7aa6cb31a1ac87 Author: Mohan Kanakam Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2018 13:15:53 +0530 clm: add new test case of API saClmClusterTrackStop() of apitest [#2914] revision 5265697c88e2821157b301dc26b064c9fa59480d Author: Mohan Kanakam Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2018 12:58:35 +0530 clm: add new test case of API saClmFinalize() of apitest [#2914] revision 6201fde1f0528bfabc0fc999a056b4d97a3b88a8 Author: Mohan Kanakam Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2018 12:54:04 +0530 clm: add new test case of API saClmDispatch() of apitest [#2914] revision bd8b29be410502c4b579e391a1cb416c8cc3222a Author: Mohan Kanakam Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2018 12:22:51 +0530 clm: add new test case of API saClmSelectionObjectGet() of apitest [#2914] revision 0202f49f5fff8601d86293c66e7bd816a1e556b8 Author: Mohan Kanakam Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2018 12:15:27 +0530 clm: add new test case of API saClmInitialize() of apitest [#2914] Complete diffstat: -- src/clm/apitest/tet_saClmClusterTrackStop.cc | 21 + src/clm/apitest/tet_saClmDispatch.cc | 110 + src/clm/apitest/tet_saClmFinalize.cc | 6 ++ src/clm/apitest/tet_saClmInitialize.cc | 53 src/clm/apitest/tet_saClmSelectionObjectGet.cc | 9 ++ 5 files changed, 199 insertions(+) Testing Commands: - ./clmtest Testing, Expected Results: -- 13 PASSED saClmInitialize with multiple instance 14 PASSED saClmInitialize_4 with clusterNodeGetCallback as null 15 PASSED saClmInitialize_4 with all parameters as null 16 PASSED saClmInitialize_4 with callback & version as null 17 PASSED saClmInitialize_4 with handle & version as null 18 PASSED saClmInitialize_4 with handle as null 19 PASSED saClmInitialize_4 with handle & ClusterNodeGetCallback as null 5 PASSED saClmSelectionObjectGet Fianlize Handle SA_AIS_ERR_BAD_HANDLE 5 PASSED saClmDispatch - invalid handle SA_DISPATCH_ONE SA_AIS_ERR_BAD_HANDLE 6 PASSED saClmDispatch - invalid handle SA_DISPATCH_BLOCKING SA_AIS_ERR_BAD_HANDLE 7 PASSED saClmDispatch - uninitilized handle SA_DISPATCH_ALL SA_AIS_ERR_BAD_HANDLE 8 PASSED saClmDispatch - uninitilized handle SA_DISPATCH_ONE SA_AIS_ERR_BAD_HANDLE 9 PASSED saClmDispatch - uninitilzed handle SA_DISPATCH_BLOCKING SA_AIS_ERR_BAD_HANDLE 10 PASSED saClmDispatch - finalized handle SA_DISPATCH_ALL SA_AIS_ERR_BAD_HANDLE 11 PASSED saClmDispatch - finalized handle SA_DISPATCH_ONE SA_AIS_ERR_BAD_HANDLE 12 PASSED saClmDispatch - finalized handle SA_DISPATCH_BLOCKING SA_AIS_ERR_BAD_HANDLE 9 PASSED saClmFinalize SA_AIS_ERR_BAD_HANDLE - uninitilzed handle 3 PASSED saClmClusterTrackStop with finalized handle, SA_AIS_ERR_BAD_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
Re: [devel] [PATCH 0/3] Review Request for imm: add new test cases of apitest [#2951]
Hi Hans, Vu, Polite remainder for review. Thanks Mohan High Availability Solutions Pvt. Ltd. www.hasolutions.in - Original Message - Subject: RE: [PATCH 0/3] Review Request for imm: add new test cases of apitest [#2951] From: mo...@hasolutions.in Date: 11/15/18 5:39 pm To: vu.m.ngu...@dektech.com.au, hans.nordeb...@ericsson.com Cc: opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, "Mohan Kanakam" Hi Hans, Vu, Polite remainder for review. Thanks Mohan High Availability Solutions Pvt. Ltd. www.hasolutions.in - Original Message - Subject: [PATCH 0/3] Review Request for imm: add new test cases of apitest [#2951] From: "Mohan Kanakam" Date: 11/1/18 1:57 pm To: vu.m.ngu...@dektech.com.au, hans.nordeb...@ericsson.com Cc: opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, "Mohan Kanakam" Summary: imm: add new test cases of API saImmOmSelectionObjectGet() of apitest [#2951] Review request for Ticket(s): 2951 Peer Reviewer(s): vu.m.nguyen, Hans Nordebck Pull request to: *** LIST THE PERSON WITH PUSH ACCESS HERE *** Affected branch(es): develop Development branch: ticket-2951 Base revision: 39928c976dfce75f69892f717df3ea128ef835aa 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 NOTE: Patch(es) contain lines longer than 80 characers Comments (indicate scope for each "y" above): - *** EXPLAIN/COMMENT THE PATCH SERIES HERE *** revision c911b14077deab58eda68f7f5786bd030b2687fb Author: Mohan Kanakam Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2018 13:41:50 +0530 imm: add new test case of API saImmOmFinalize() of apitest [#2951] revision edae9e76d7f286fa400de1cd4c51a0ccc225de8c Author: Mohan Kanakam Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2018 13:32:04 +0530 imm: add new test case of API saImmOmDispatch() of apitest [#2951] revision 1fceef2f35a08c2490c11c9329725b58a6377e79 Author: Mohan Kanakam Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2018 13:15:40 +0530 imm: add new test cases of API saImmOmSelectionObjectGet() of apitest [#2951] Complete diffstat: -- src/imm/apitest/management/test_saImmOmDispatch.c | 72 ++ src/imm/apitest/management/test_saImmOmFinalize.c | 15 + .../apitest/management/test_saImmOmInitialize.c | 51 +++ .../management/test_saImmOmSelectionObjectGet.c | 15 + 4 files changed, 153 insertions(+) Testing Commands: - ./immomtest 1 Testing, Expected Results: -- 14 PASSED saImmOmSelectionObjectGet - SA_AIS_ERR_BAD_HANDLE - uninitlized handle 15 PASSED saImmOmSelectionObjectGet - SA_AIS_ERR_BAD_HANDLE - finalized handle 20 PASSED saImmOmDispatch - SA_AIS_ERR_BAD_HANDLE - uninitilized handle SA_DISPATCH_ONE 21 PASSED saImmOmDispatch - SA_AIS_ERR_BAD_HANDLE - finalized handle SA_DISPATCH_ONE 22 PASSED saImmOmDispatch - SA_AIS_OK SA_DISPATCH_BLOCKING 23 PASSED saImmOmDispatch - SA_AIS_ERR_BAD_HANDLE - invalid handle SA_DISPATCH_ALL 24 PASSED saImmOmDispatch - SA_AIS_ERR_BAD_HANDLE - uninitilized handle SA_DISPATCH_ALL 25 PASSED saImmOmDispatch - SA_AIS_ERR_BAD_HANDLE - finalized handle SA_DISPATCH_ALL 26 PASSED saImmOmDispatch - SA_AIS_ERR_BAD_HANDLE - invalid handle SA_DISPATCH_BLOCKING 27 PASSED saImmOmDispatch - SA_AIS_ERR_BAD_HANDLE - uninitilized handle SA_DISPATCH_BLOCKING 28 PASSED saImmOmDispatch - SA_AIS_ERR_BAD_HANDLE - finalized handle SA_DISPATCH_BLOCKING 31 PASSED saImmOmFinalize - SA_AIS_ERR_BAD_HANDLE - finalized handle 32 PASSED saImmOmFinalize - SA_AIS_ERR_BAD_HANDLE - uninitlized 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
Re: [devel] [PATCH 0/7] Review Request for ckpt: add new test cases in apitest [#2939]
Hi Hans/Vu/Gary/Alex, Polite remainder for review. Thanks Mohan High Availability Solutions Pvt. Ltd. www.hasolutions.in - Original Message - Subject: RE: [PATCH 0/7] Review Request for ckpt: add new test cases in apitest [#2939] From: mo...@hasolutions.in Date: 11/15/18 5:43 pm To: hans.nordeb...@ericsson.com, vu.m.ngu...@dektech.com.au, gary@dektech.com.au, ajo...@rbbn.com Cc: opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, "Mohan Kanakam" Hi Hans/Vu/Gary/Alex, Polite remainder for review. Thanks Mohan High Availability Solutions Pvt. Ltd. www.hasolutions.in - Original Message - Subject: [PATCH 0/7] Review Request for ckpt: add new test cases in apitest [#2939] From: "Mohan Kanakam" Date: 10/13/18 4:31 pm To: hans.nordeb...@ericsson.com, vu.m.ngu...@dektech.com.au, gary@dektech.com.au, ajo...@rbbn.com Cc: opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, "Mohan Kanakam" Summary: ckpt: add new test case of API saCkptSectionIterationInitialize() of apitest [#2939] Review request for Ticket(s): 2939_4 Peer Reviewer(s):Hans Nordeback, Vu Minh Nguyen, Gary Lee, Alex Jones Pull request to: *** LIST THE PERSON WITH PUSH ACCESS HERE *** Affected branch(es): develop Development branch: ticket-2939_4 Base revision: cad806745a2eb96024ff18081ccf6d208b0fb93b 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 NOTE: Patch(es) contain lines longer than 80 characers Comments (indicate scope for each "y" above): - *** EXPLAIN/COMMENT THE PATCH SERIES HERE *** revision 096c47cfbea926015883da65a403bf86b63717ac Author: Mohan Kanakam Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2018 15:53:23 +0530 ckpt: add new test case of API saCkptCheckpointRetentionDurationSet() of apitest [#2939] revision 885f4da259a29241c6b2b6b0f149a29c2269517c Author: Mohan Kanakam Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2018 14:40:25 +0530 ckpt: add new test case of API saCkptSectionOverwrite() of apitest [#2939] revision f5e5cc8b1e82f3eca97d1bd78df0c34e4e06 Author: Mohan Kanakam Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2018 13:29:03 +0530 ckpt: add new test case of API saCkptCheckpointRead() of apitest [#2939] revision e7f9721e9cf22d3dd5e667ced9d972ca89535c7f Author: Mohan Kanakam Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2018 13:10:19 +0530 ckpt: add new test case of API saCkptCheckpointWrite() of apitest [#2939] revision 20c640d362d4ebe3540566127bc04d0309eb Author: Mohan Kanakam Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2018 12:44:05 +0530 ckpt: add new test case of API saCkptSectionIterationFinalize() of apitest [#2939] revision e07a77b3bbade51ea64ad896a2247065e71ad2b3 Author: Mohan Kanakam Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2018 12:24:56 +0530 ckpt: add new test case of API saCkptSectionIterationNext() of apitest [#2939] revision 15fd06f837dff2ae970468c065ab0f43477de7da Author: Mohan Kanakam Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2018 12:02:56 +0530 ckpt: add new test case of API saCkptSectionIterationInitialize() of apitest [#2939] Complete diffstat: -- src/ckpt/apitest/test_cpa.c | 334 +++ src/ckpt/apitest/test_cpa_util.c | 22 +++ src/ckpt/apitest/test_cpsv.h | 6 + 3 files changed, 362 insertions(+) Testing Commands: - ./ckpttest Testing, Expected Results: -- 9 PASSED To verify section iteration init after close 5 PASSED To verify iter next after close 4 PASSED To verify iter finalize when ckpt has been finalized 14 PASSED To verify iter finalize when ckpt has been closed and unlinked 11 PASSED To verify read after checkpoint is closed 12 PASSED To verify overwrite after close 6 PASSED To test ret.duration after finalize 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,
Re: [devel] [PATCH 0/3] Review Request for ckpt: add new test cases in apitest [#2939]
Hi Hans/Vu/Gary/Alex, Polite remainder for review. Thanks Mohan High Availability Solutions Pvt. Ltd. www.hasolutions.in - Original Message - Subject: RE: [PATCH 0/3] Review Request for ckpt: add new test cases in apitest [#2939] From: mo...@hasolutions.in Date: 11/15/18 5:43 pm To: hans.nordeb...@ericsson.com, vu.m.ngu...@dektech.com.au, gary@dektech.com.au, ajo...@rbbn.com Cc: opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, "Mohan Kanakam" Hi Hans/Vu/Gary/Alex, Polite remainder for review. Thanks Mohan High Availability Solutions Pvt. Ltd. www.hasolutions.in - Original Message - Subject: [PATCH 0/3] Review Request for ckpt: add new test cases in apitest [#2939] From: "Mohan Kanakam" Date: 10/12/18 7:00 pm To: hans.nordeb...@ericsson.com, vu.m.ngu...@dektech.com.au, gary@dektech.com.au, ajo...@rbbn.com Cc: opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, "Mohan Kanakam" Summary: ckpt: add new test case of API saCkptSectionCreate() of apitest [#2939] Review request for Ticket(s): 2939_3 Peer Reviewer(s):Hans Nordeback, Vu Minh Nguyen, Gary Lee, Alex Jones Pull request to: *** LIST THE PERSON WITH PUSH ACCESS HERE *** Affected branch(es): develop Development branch: ticket-2939_3 Base revision: cad806745a2eb96024ff18081ccf6d208b0fb93b 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 NOTE: Patch(es) contain lines longer than 80 characers Comments (indicate scope for each "y" above): - *** EXPLAIN/COMMENT THE PATCH SERIES HERE *** revision c661dce0f91d67ae65c4b880a8aab8f0845e3720 Author: Mohan Kanakam Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2018 17:50:55 +0530 ckpt: add new test case of API saCkptSectionExpirationTimeSet() of apitest [#2939] revision d0057fc006121e480f8aea68ee242d261cd0bab4 Author: Mohan Kanakam Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2018 17:26:51 +0530 ckpt: add new test case of API saCkptSectionDelete() of apitest [#2939] revision bec0bacba2a5f2d3f9489ab63707a73632db304c Author: Mohan Kanakam Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2018 16:24:44 +0530 ckpt: add new test case of API saCkptSectionCreate() of apitest [#2939] Complete diffstat: -- src/ckpt/apitest/test_cpa.c | 232 +++ src/ckpt/apitest/test_cpa_util.c | 13 +++ src/ckpt/apitest/test_cpsv.h | 3 + 3 files changed, 248 insertions(+) Testing Commands: - ./ckpttest Testing, Expected Results: -- 6 PASSED To verify section exp set after finalize 7 PASSED To verify section exp set after close 7 PASSED To verify section delete after finalize 8 PASSED To verify section delete after close 17 PASSED To verify Section create after Closing the checkpoint designated by checkpointHandle 18 PASSED To verify that section create after finalize 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
Re: [devel] [PATCH 0/4] Review Request for ckpt: add new test cases in apitest [#2939]
Hi Hans/Vu/Gary/Alex, Polite remainder for review. Thanks Mohan High Availability Solutions Pvt. Ltd. www.hasolutions.in - Original Message - Subject: RE: [PATCH 0/4] Review Request for ckpt: add new test cases in apitest [#2939] From: mo...@hasolutions.in Date: 11/15/18 5:44 pm To: hans.nordeb...@ericsson.com, vu.m.ngu...@dektech.com.au, gary@dektech.com.au, ajo...@rbbn.com Cc: opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, "Mohan Kanakam" Hi Hans/Vu/Gary/Alex, Polite remainder for review. Thanks Mohan High Availability Solutions Pvt. Ltd. www.hasolutions.in - Original Message - Subject: [PATCH 0/4] Review Request for ckpt: add new test cases in apitest [#2939] From: "Mohan Kanakam" Date: 10/12/18 3:28 pm To: hans.nordeb...@ericsson.com, vu.m.ngu...@dektech.com.au, gary@dektech.com.au, ajo...@rbbn.com Cc: opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, "Mohan Kanakam" Summary: ckpt: add new test case of API saCkptCheckpointOpen() of apitest [#2939] Review request for Ticket(s): 2939_2 Peer Reviewer(s):Hans Nordeback, Vu Minh Nguyen, Gary Lee, Alex Jones Pull request to: *** LIST THE PERSON WITH PUSH ACCESS HERE *** Affected branch(es): develop Development branch: ticket-2939_2 Base revision: cad806745a2eb96024ff18081ccf6d208b0fb93b 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 NOTE: Patch(es) contain lines longer than 80 characers Comments (indicate scope for each "y" above): - *** EXPLAIN/COMMENT THE PATCH SERIES HERE *** revision 0e7f00e947bd26a5a2ea783dead46bcdffea57e6 Author: Mohan Kanakam Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2018 15:10:59 +0530 ckpt: add new test case of API saCkptCheckpointStatusGet() of apitest [#2939] revision 9746a8ed4f34d801c6bf359f85366e2d46ba69b1 Author: Mohan Kanakam Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2018 14:19:25 +0530 ckpt: add new test case of API saCkptCheckpointUnlink() of apitest [#2939] revision 7380183362522558168ba091ffc4a63ef8631107 Author: Mohan Kanakam Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2018 14:08:03 +0530 ckpt: add new test case of API saCkptCheckpointClose() of apitest [#2939] revision 034a14a9188ef72637dfa33327242ce473af6786 Author: Mohan Kanakam Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2018 13:22:07 +0530 ckpt: add new test case of API saCkptCheckpointOpen() of apitest [#2939] Complete diffstat: -- src/ckpt/apitest/test_cpa.c | 160 +- src/ckpt/apitest/test_cpa_util.c | 22 +- src/ckpt/apitest/test_cpsv.h | 5 ++ src/ckpt/apitest/test_cpsv_conf.h | 2 + 4 files changed, 187 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) Testing Commands: - ./ckpttest Testing, Expected Results: -- 58 PASSED To verify opening a ckpt with synchronous update option with syc cbk handle 59 PASSED To verify opening a ckpt with asynchronous update option with syc cbk handle 9 PASSED To verify that close after finalize 13 PASSED To test unlink with synchronous update handle 14 PASSED To test unlink with asynchronous update handle 5 PASSED To test Status get for active replica ckpt 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
Re: [devel] [PATCH 0/1] Review Request for ckpt: add new test case of API saCkptInitialize() of apitest v2 [#2913]
Hi Hans/Vu/Gary/Alex, Polite remainder for review. Thanks Mohan High Availability Solutions Pvt. Ltd. www.hasolutions.in - Original Message - Subject: RE: [PATCH 0/1] Review Request for ckpt: add new test case of API saCkptInitialize() of apitest v2 [#2913] From: mo...@hasolutions.in Date: 11/15/18 5:45 pm To: hans.nordeb...@ericsson.com, vu.m.ngu...@dektech.com.au, gary@dektech.com.au, ajo...@rbbn.com Cc: opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, "Mohan Kanakam" Hi Hans/Vu/Gary/Alex, Polite remainder for review. Thanks Mohan High Availability Solutions Pvt. Ltd. www.hasolutions.in - Original Message - Subject: [PATCH 0/1] Review Request for ckpt: add new test case of API saCkptInitialize() of apitest v2 [#2913] From: "Mohan Kanakam" Date: 10/10/18 5:37 pm To: hans.nordeb...@ericsson.com, vu.m.ngu...@dektech.com.au, gary@dektech.com.au, ajo...@rbbn.com Cc: opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, "Mohan Kanakam" Summary: ckpt: add new test case of API saCkptInitialize() of apitest v2 [#2913] Review request for Ticket(s): 2913 Peer Reviewer(s):Hans Nordeback, Vu Minh Nguyen, Gary Lee, Alex Jones Pull request to: *** LIST THE PERSON WITH PUSH ACCESS HERE *** Affected branch(es): develop Development branch: ticket-2913 Base revision: cad806745a2eb96024ff18081ccf6d208b0fb93b 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 NOTE: Patch(es) contain lines longer than 80 characers Comments (indicate scope for each "y" above): - *** EXPLAIN/COMMENT THE PATCH SERIES HERE *** revision 3d4d27499403eecfbdaebd50949bd03b44c36ae7 Author: Mohan Kanakam Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2018 17:29:30 +0530 ckpt: add new test case of API saCkptInitialize() of apitest v2 [#2913] Complete diffstat: -- src/ckpt/apitest/test_cpa.c | 60 +++ src/ckpt/apitest/test_cpa_util.c | 3 ++ src/ckpt/apitest/test_cpsv.h | 1 + src/ckpt/apitest/test_cpsv_conf.h | 3 ++ 4 files changed, 67 insertions(+) Testing Commands: - ./ckpttest Testing, Expected Results: -- All tests were passed 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. ___
Re: [devel] [PATCH 1/1] ntf: Increase the priority when sending MDS_DOWN to NTFD maind thread [#2973]
Hi Canh,
I see, yes I suspected that it was some test printouts etc. that were to be
removed.
Ack.
I still have not checked the solution as such and its consequences and I have
not done any actual test.
Thanks
Lennart
-Original Message-
From: Canh Van Truong
Sent: den 28 november 2018 05:13
To: Lennart Lund ; Minh Hon Chau
Cc: opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Canh Van Truong
Subject: [PATCH 1/1] ntf: Increase the priority when sending MDS_DOWN to NTFD
maind thread [#2973]
When the sending notification request come to NTFD , they are put in the mbx to
wait for being processed. if client of these request is down, MDS thread
receive the event down and also put to mbx. The priority of event down and send
request are the same. So NTF will process the send request before the event
down.
The patch increases the priority when puting the MDS_DOWN event to main thread
---
src/ntf/ntfd/ntfs_mds.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/src/ntf/ntfd/ntfs_mds.c b/src/ntf/ntfd/ntfs_mds.c index
a4b4a5f09..bede30cef 100644
--- a/src/ntf/ntfd/ntfs_mds.c
+++ b/src/ntf/ntfd/ntfs_mds.c
@@ -954,7 +954,7 @@ static uint32_t mds_svc_event(struct ncsmds_callback_info
*info)
/* Push the event and we are done */
if (m_NCS_IPC_SEND(_cb->mbx, evt,
- NCS_IPC_PRIORITY_HIGH) !=
+ NCS_IPC_PRIORITY_VERY_HIGH) !=
NCSCC_RC_SUCCESS) {
TRACE("ipc send failed");
ntfs_evt_destroy(evt);
--
2.15.1
___
Opensaf-devel mailing list
Opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel
