Re: [devel] [PATCH 0/1] Review Request for ntf: restart ntfimcnd if operation invoker name is missing [#2859]
Hi Hoa, I don't have any more comments, looks good. Thanks Minh On 08/06/18 15:10, Hoa Le wrote: Hi Lennart, Thanks for your comments, I will correct the LOG_ERR when pushing the patch. Hi Minh, Do you have any comments for this patch ? -- Best regards, Hoa Le On 06/07/2018 09:46 PM, Lennart Lund wrote: Hi, Ack with comments. See attached diff file Thanks Lennart -Original Message- From: Hoa Le Sent: den 4 juni 2018 07:07 To: Minh Hon Chau; Lennart Lund Cc:opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Hoa Le Subject: [PATCH 0/1] Review Request for ntf: restart ntfimcnd if operation invoker name is missing [#2859] Summary: ntf: restart ntfimcnd if operation invoker name is missing [#2859] Review request for Ticket(s): 2859 Peer Reviewer(s): Minh, Lennart Pull request to: Minh, Lennart Affected branch(es): develop Development branch: ticket-2859 Base revision: 5d8d104ef442e4c58e2c6f870b912994a1e68398 Personal repository:git://git.code.sf.net/u/xhoalee/review Impacted area Impact y/n Docsn Build systemn RPM/packaging n Configuration files n Startup scripts n SAF servicesy OpenSAF servicesn Core libraries n Samples n Tests n Other n Comments (indicate scope for each "y" above): - revision 5e15806a1f08c5b98941371f1dd49b8a4727aaec Author: Hoa Le Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2018 11:54:34 +0700 ntf: restart ntfimcnd if operation invoker name is missing [#2859] If ntfimcnd was restarted during a CCB, it might receive ObjectDelete operation as the first event. ccbUtilCcbData, which was initialized in this case, does not contain the operation invoker name. This causes ntfimcnd to crash and generates a coredump when the ccbUtilCcbData being used in the next ApplyCallback. This patch helps avoid the above issue by validating the operation invoker name in ApplyCallback and restarting ntfimcnd if the invoker name is invalid. An error report notification will be sent out when ntfimcnd being successfully started. Complete diffstat: -- src/ntf/ntfimcnd/ntfimcn_imm.c | 14 ++ 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+) Testing Commands: - N/A Testing, Expected Results: -- N/A Conditions of Submission: - Ack from reviewer Arch Built StartedLinux distro --- mipsn 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
Re: [devel] [PATCH 0/1] Review Request for ntf: restart ntfimcnd if operation invoker name is missing [#2859]
Hi Lennart, Thanks for your comments, I will correct the LOG_ERR when pushing the patch. Hi Minh, Do you have any comments for this patch ? -- Best regards, Hoa Le On 06/07/2018 09:46 PM, Lennart Lund wrote: Hi, Ack with comments. See attached diff file Thanks Lennart -Original Message- From: Hoa Le Sent: den 4 juni 2018 07:07 To: Minh Hon Chau ; Lennart Lund Cc: opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Hoa Le Subject: [PATCH 0/1] Review Request for ntf: restart ntfimcnd if operation invoker name is missing [#2859] Summary: ntf: restart ntfimcnd if operation invoker name is missing [#2859] Review request for Ticket(s): 2859 Peer Reviewer(s): Minh, Lennart Pull request to: Minh, Lennart Affected branch(es): develop Development branch: ticket-2859 Base revision: 5d8d104ef442e4c58e2c6f870b912994a1e68398 Personal repository: git://git.code.sf.net/u/xhoalee/review Impacted area Impact y/n Docsn Build systemn RPM/packaging n Configuration files n Startup scripts n SAF servicesy OpenSAF servicesn Core libraries n Samples n Tests n Other n Comments (indicate scope for each "y" above): - revision 5e15806a1f08c5b98941371f1dd49b8a4727aaec Author: Hoa Le Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2018 11:54:34 +0700 ntf: restart ntfimcnd if operation invoker name is missing [#2859] If ntfimcnd was restarted during a CCB, it might receive ObjectDelete operation as the first event. ccbUtilCcbData, which was initialized in this case, does not contain the operation invoker name. This causes ntfimcnd to crash and generates a coredump when the ccbUtilCcbData being used in the next ApplyCallback. This patch helps avoid the above issue by validating the operation invoker name in ApplyCallback and restarting ntfimcnd if the invoker name is invalid. An error report notification will be sent out when ntfimcnd being successfully started. Complete diffstat: -- src/ntf/ntfimcnd/ntfimcn_imm.c | 14 ++ 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+) Testing Commands: - N/A Testing, Expected Results: -- N/A Conditions of Submission: - Ack from reviewer Arch Built StartedLinux distro --- mipsn 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
Re: [devel] [PATCH 0/1] Review Request for ntf: restart ntfimcnd if operation invoker name is missing [#2859]
Hi, Ack with comments. See attached diff file Thanks Lennart > -Original Message- > From: Hoa Le > Sent: den 4 juni 2018 07:07 > To: Minh Hon Chau ; Lennart Lund > > Cc: opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Hoa Le > Subject: [PATCH 0/1] Review Request for ntf: restart ntfimcnd if operation > invoker name is missing [#2859] > > Summary: ntf: restart ntfimcnd if operation invoker name is missing [#2859] > Review request for Ticket(s): 2859 > Peer Reviewer(s): Minh, Lennart > Pull request to: Minh, Lennart > Affected branch(es): develop > Development branch: ticket-2859 > Base revision: 5d8d104ef442e4c58e2c6f870b912994a1e68398 > Personal repository: git://git.code.sf.net/u/xhoalee/review > > > Impacted area Impact y/n > > Docsn > Build systemn > RPM/packaging n > Configuration files n > Startup scripts n > SAF servicesy > OpenSAF servicesn > Core libraries n > Samples n > Tests n > Other n > > > Comments (indicate scope for each "y" above): > - > > revision 5e15806a1f08c5b98941371f1dd49b8a4727aaec > Author: Hoa Le > Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2018 11:54:34 +0700 > > ntf: restart ntfimcnd if operation invoker name is missing [#2859] > > If ntfimcnd was restarted during a CCB, it might receive ObjectDelete > operation as the first event. ccbUtilCcbData, which was initialized > in this case, does not contain the operation invoker name. This causes > ntfimcnd to crash and generates a coredump when the ccbUtilCcbData > being used in the next ApplyCallback. > > This patch helps avoid the above issue by validating the operation > invoker name in ApplyCallback and restarting ntfimcnd if the invoker > name is invalid. An error report notification will be sent out when > ntfimcnd being successfully started. > > > > Complete diffstat: > -- > src/ntf/ntfimcnd/ntfimcn_imm.c | 14 ++ > 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+) > > > Testing Commands: > - > N/A > > > Testing, Expected Results: > -- > N/A > > > Conditions of Submission: > - > Ack from reviewer > > > Arch Built StartedLinux distro > --- > mipsn 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. > >
[devel] [PATCH 0/1] Review Request for ntf: restart ntfimcnd if operation invoker name is missing [#2859]
Summary: ntf: restart ntfimcnd if operation invoker name is missing [#2859] Review request for Ticket(s): 2859 Peer Reviewer(s): Minh, Lennart Pull request to: Minh, Lennart Affected branch(es): develop Development branch: ticket-2859 Base revision: 5d8d104ef442e4c58e2c6f870b912994a1e68398 Personal repository: git://git.code.sf.net/u/xhoalee/review Impacted area Impact y/n Docsn Build systemn RPM/packaging n Configuration files n Startup scripts n SAF servicesy OpenSAF servicesn Core libraries n Samples n Tests n Other n Comments (indicate scope for each "y" above): - revision 5e15806a1f08c5b98941371f1dd49b8a4727aaec Author: Hoa Le Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2018 11:54:34 +0700 ntf: restart ntfimcnd if operation invoker name is missing [#2859] If ntfimcnd was restarted during a CCB, it might receive ObjectDelete operation as the first event. ccbUtilCcbData, which was initialized in this case, does not contain the operation invoker name. This causes ntfimcnd to crash and generates a coredump when the ccbUtilCcbData being used in the next ApplyCallback. This patch helps avoid the above issue by validating the operation invoker name in ApplyCallback and restarting ntfimcnd if the invoker name is invalid. An error report notification will be sent out when ntfimcnd being successfully started. Complete diffstat: -- src/ntf/ntfimcnd/ntfimcn_imm.c | 14 ++ 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+) Testing Commands: - N/A Testing, Expected Results: -- N/A Conditions of Submission: - Ack from reviewer Arch Built StartedLinux distro --- mipsn 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. -- 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
