Re: [devel] [PATCH 0/1] Review Request for base: Re-factor the timer implementation [#2440]

2018-04-17 Thread Ravi Sekhar Reddy Konda 
Hi Anders,

I see you have provided an alternate implementation based on AIS TMR API 
instead of legacy NCS Timer API, this is  good.
I hope you have completely taken care of backward compatibility,  cases like in 
the current OpenSAF Services we are using NCS Timer API, can I use new AIS TMR 
API for the new timers, that is at a time can  SAF Service use different timer 
implementations for different Timers?

Me and Syam are reviewing code, we need couple of more days to complete the 
review. Will let you our review comments once done.

This enhancement needs PR doc update also, while we complete the review, can 
you provide the PR doc update also
  
Thanks,
Ravi


-Original Message-
From: Anders Widell [mailto:anders.wid...@ericsson.com] 
Sent: Monday, April 09, 2018 10:00 PM
To: Ravi Sekhar Reddy Konda 
Cc: opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Anders Widell 

Subject: [PATCH 0/1] Review Request for base: Re-factor the timer 
implementation [#2440]

Summary: base: Re-factor the timer implementation [#2440] Review request for 
Ticket(s): 2440 Peer Reviewer(s): Ravi Pull request to: 
Affected branch(es): develop
Development branch: ticket-2440
Base revision: b83be452a25a37c7f5b568b436d1af544afb7350
Personal repository: git://git.code.sf.net/u/anders-w/review


Impacted area   Impact y/n

 Docsn
 Build systemn
 RPM/packaging   n
 Configuration files n
 Startup scripts n
 SAF servicesn
 OpenSAF servicesn
 Core libraries  y
 Samples n
 Tests   n
 Other   n


Comments (indicate scope for each "y" above):
-

revision 49be7d5f610fb7e23d8df575007fa3b21a5e0946
Author: Anders Widell 
Date:   Mon, 9 Apr 2018 16:10:41 +0200

base: Re-factor the timer implementation [#2440]

Re-factor the NCS timer implementation and provide the AIS TMR API as an 
alternative way to use the timer implementation, alongside with the old NCS 
API. The AIS TMR API is intended for internal use in OpenSAF services for now, 
but it could be exported as an official OpenSAF API later if it turns out to be 
working well. OpenSAF services using the TMR API instead of the NCS API will no 
longer need a dedicated timer thread.

The new timer implementation is using a C++ STL multiset for the timer queue, 
and a Linux timerfd for the selection object.



Added Files:

 src/ais/include/saTmr.h
 src/base/handle/external_mutex.h
 src/base/handle/handle.cc
 src/base/handle/handle.h
 src/base/handle/object_db.cc
 src/base/handle/object_db.h
 src/base/handle/object.h
 src/base/ncssysf_tmr.cc
 src/base/tests/sa_tmr_test.cc
 src/base/timer/saTmr.cc
 src/base/timer/timer.h
 src/base/timer/timer_handle.cc
 src/base/timer/timer_handle.h


Removed Files:
--
 src/base/sysf_tmr.c


Complete diffstat:
--
 cppcheck_append.cc   |   12 +
 src/ais/Makefile.am  |3 +
 src/ais/include/saTmr.h  |  148 ++
 src/base/Makefile.am |   13 +-
 src/base/handle/external_mutex.h |   66 +++
 src/base/handle/handle.cc|   63 +++
 src/base/handle/handle.h |  107 
 src/base/handle/object.h |   52 ++
 src/base/handle/object_db.cc |   91 
 src/base/handle/object_db.h  |  109 
 src/base/ncssysf_tmr.cc  |  254 +
 src/base/ncssysf_tmr.h   |  135 +++--
 src/base/ncssysf_tsk.h   |4 +-
 src/base/sysf_tmr.c  | 1085 --
 src/base/tests/sa_tmr_test.cc| 1079 +
 src/base/tests/sysf_tmr_test.cc  |  205 +--
 src/base/timer/saTmr.cc  |  569 
 src/base/timer/timer.h   |   55 ++
 src/base/timer/timer_handle.cc   |  190 +++
 src/base/timer/timer_handle.h|  101 
 20 files changed, 3149 insertions(+), 1192 deletions(-)


Testing Commands:
-

make check


Testing, Expected Results:
--

Unit tests shall pass


Conditions of Submission:
-

Ack from reviewer(s), or on 2018-04-16 if no comments have been received.


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.

[devel] [PATCH 0/1] Review Request for base: Re-factor the timer implementation [#2440]

2018-04-09 Thread Anders Widell 
Summary: base: Re-factor the timer implementation [#2440]
Review request for Ticket(s): 2440
Peer Reviewer(s): Ravi
Pull request to: 
Affected branch(es): develop
Development branch: ticket-2440
Base revision: b83be452a25a37c7f5b568b436d1af544afb7350
Personal repository: git://git.code.sf.net/u/anders-w/review


Impacted area   Impact y/n

 Docsn
 Build systemn
 RPM/packaging   n
 Configuration files n
 Startup scripts n
 SAF servicesn
 OpenSAF servicesn
 Core libraries  y
 Samples n
 Tests   n
 Other   n


Comments (indicate scope for each "y" above):
-

revision 49be7d5f610fb7e23d8df575007fa3b21a5e0946
Author: Anders Widell 
Date:   Mon, 9 Apr 2018 16:10:41 +0200

base: Re-factor the timer implementation [#2440]

Re-factor the NCS timer implementation and provide the AIS TMR API as an
alternative way to use the timer implementation, alongside with the old NCS
API. The AIS TMR API is intended for internal use in OpenSAF services for now,
but it could be exported as an official OpenSAF API later if it turns out to be
working well. OpenSAF services using the TMR API instead of the NCS API will no
longer need a dedicated timer thread.

The new timer implementation is using a C++ STL multiset for the timer queue,
and a Linux timerfd for the selection object.



Added Files:

 src/ais/include/saTmr.h
 src/base/handle/external_mutex.h
 src/base/handle/handle.cc
 src/base/handle/handle.h
 src/base/handle/object_db.cc
 src/base/handle/object_db.h
 src/base/handle/object.h
 src/base/ncssysf_tmr.cc
 src/base/tests/sa_tmr_test.cc
 src/base/timer/saTmr.cc
 src/base/timer/timer.h
 src/base/timer/timer_handle.cc
 src/base/timer/timer_handle.h


Removed Files:
--
 src/base/sysf_tmr.c


Complete diffstat:
--
 cppcheck_append.cc   |   12 +
 src/ais/Makefile.am  |3 +
 src/ais/include/saTmr.h  |  148 ++
 src/base/Makefile.am |   13 +-
 src/base/handle/external_mutex.h |   66 +++
 src/base/handle/handle.cc|   63 +++
 src/base/handle/handle.h |  107 
 src/base/handle/object.h |   52 ++
 src/base/handle/object_db.cc |   91 
 src/base/handle/object_db.h  |  109 
 src/base/ncssysf_tmr.cc  |  254 +
 src/base/ncssysf_tmr.h   |  135 +++--
 src/base/ncssysf_tsk.h   |4 +-
 src/base/sysf_tmr.c  | 1085 --
 src/base/tests/sa_tmr_test.cc| 1079 +
 src/base/tests/sysf_tmr_test.cc  |  205 +--
 src/base/timer/saTmr.cc  |  569 
 src/base/timer/timer.h   |   55 ++
 src/base/timer/timer_handle.cc   |  190 +++
 src/base/timer/timer_handle.h|  101 
 20 files changed, 3149 insertions(+), 1192 deletions(-)


Testing Commands:
-

make check


Testing, Expected Results:
--

Unit tests shall pass


Conditions of Submission:
-

Ack from reviewer(s), or on 2018-04-16 if no comments have been received.


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