Re: [devel] [PATCH 0 of 8] Review Request for CKPT: Support DNs longer than 255 bytes [#1574]

Hi Hoang, On 6/23/2016 4:23 PM, Hoang Vo wrote: > Testing Commands: > - > start all SCs and PLs > log in to Sc-1 > run ckpttest > enable long DN setting Can you please how steps to enable long DN setting. it will be more useful to have README about long DN Support similar

[devel] [PATCH 1 of 1] AMFD: Correct the size of synchronizing node after headless [#1984]

osaf/services/saf/amf/amfd/ndfsm.cc | 2 +- 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) If more than 2 payloads are joining from headless, amfd will think all nodes have already been synced even there's still one being in headless sync period. The patch corrects the conditional statement

[devel] [PATCH 0 of 1] Review Request for AMFD: Correct the size of synchronizing node after headless [#1894]

Summary: AMFD: Correct the size of synchronizing node after headless [#1894] Review request for Trac Ticket(s): 1894 Peer Reviewer(s): AMF maintainers Pull request to: Gary Affected branch(es): 5.0, default Development branch: default Impacted area Impact

[devel] [PATCH 0 of 1] Review Request for smf: Lock nodes in parallel [#1634]

Summary: smf: Lock nodes in parallel Review request for Trac Ticket(s): #1634 Peer Reviewer(s): reddy.neelaka...@oracle.com, rafael.odza...@ericsson.com Pull request to: <> Affected branch(es): <> Development branch: <> Impacted area Impact y/n

[devel] [PATCH 1 of 1] smf: Lock nodes in parallel [#1634]

osaf/services/saf/smfsv/smfd/SmfUpgradeStep.cc | 1075 +++-- osaf/services/saf/smfsv/smfd/SmfUpgradeStep.hh |99 +- osaf/services/saf/smfsv/smfd/SmfUtils.cc | 2 + osaf/services/saf/smfsv/smfd/smfd_campaign_oi.cc | 2 +-

Re: [devel] [PATCH 1 of 1] immtool: Add missing wrappers for IMM APIs [#1891]

Hi Hung, Reviewed the patch. Ack from me. Thanks, Zoran -Original Message- From: Hung Nguyen [mailto:hung.d.ngu...@dektech.com.au] Sent: Friday, June 24, 2016 1:37 PM To: Zoran Milinkovic ; reddy.neelaka...@oracle.com Cc:

Re: [devel] [PATCH 0 of 1] Review Request for smf: Lock nodes in parallel [#1634]

Hi Neel To handle node-groups this way (contain all handling within one operation) have some advantages: * Everything is contained within this new admin operation class. External users does not have to have any knowledge about IMM, any handles, node-groups or other inner workings of an admin

Re: [devel] [PATCH 2 of 3] imm: Assert 'rspList' before generating search bundle response [#1881]

Hi Hung, Reviewed the patch. Ack from me. Thanks, Zoran -Original Message- From: Hung Nguyen [mailto:hung.d.ngu...@dektech.com.au] Sent: Friday, June 17, 2016 6:34 AM To: Zoran Milinkovic ; reddy.neelaka...@oracle.com Cc:

Re: [devel] [PATCH 0 of 5] Review Request for imm: Fix cppcheck warnings [#1883]

Hi Zoran/Hung, I over looked the case B, The comment on patch 4 can be ignored. Thanks, Neel. On 2016/06/28 05:18 PM, Zoran Milinkovic wrote: > Hi Neelakanta, > > In patch 4, the case b) is ok since the "case 'B':" continues with "case > 'A':" where pbe2 is set to true. > "pbe2 = true;" in

Re: [devel] [PATCH 0 of 5] Review Request for imm: Fix cppcheck warnings [#1883]

Hi Neelakanta, In patch 4, the case b) is ok since the "case 'B':" continues with "case 'A':" where pbe2 is set to true. "pbe2 = true;" in "case B:" is redundant. Thanks, Zoran -Original Message- From: Neelakanta Reddy [mailto:reddy.neelaka...@oracle.com] Sent: Monday, June 27, 2016

Re: [devel] [PATCH 0 of 5] Review Request for imm: Fix cppcheck warnings [#1883]

Hi Hung, I have the same comment as Neelakanta for the missing replacement with strdup. Reviewed the code. Ack from me. Thanks, Zoran -Original Message- From: Hung Nguyen [mailto:hung.d.ngu...@dektech.com.au] Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2016 6:31 AM To: Zoran Milinkovic

Re: [devel] [PATCH 0 of 1] Review Request for smf: Lock nodes in parallel [#1634]

Hi Leannart, Reviewed and tested the patch. Ack. General comments: why for each admin operation a new nodegroup is created. Create one nodegroup and use for all operations. /Neel. On 2016/06/17 08:38 PM, Lennart Lund wrote: > Summary: smf: Lock nodes in parallel > Review request for Trac