Summary: log: saflogger to return EXIT_FAILURE when SaLogWriteLogCallbackT
fails - v2 [#884]
Review request for Trac Ticket(s): #884
Peer Reviewer(s): Lennart
Pull request to: <<LIST THE PERSON WITH PUSH ACCESS HERE>>
Affected branch(es): opensaf-4.3.x, 4.4.x, default
Development branch: <<IF ANY GIVE THE REPO URL>>
--------------------------------
Impacted area Impact y/n
--------------------------------
Docs n
Build system n
RPM/packaging n
Configuration files n
Startup scripts n
SAF services y
OpenSAF services n
Core libraries n
Samples n
Tests n
Other n
Comments (indicate scope for each "y" above):
---------------------------------------------
Note: I'm not sure if BAD_OPERATION is the most suited error code in
the case of an mismatching invocation Id, but still iam unable to think
of anything else either!
changeset 278424c712d38bca6859e9682d777e1d654daf26
Author: Mathivanan N.P.<mathi.naic...@oracle.com>
Date: Tue, 06 May 2014 18:33:45 -0400
log: saflogger to return EXIT_FAILURE when SaLogWriteLogCallbackT
fails- v2
[#884] saflogger is not returning appropriate exit code to the shell
when
SaLogWriteLogCallbackT fails either because of an error reported in the
callback or because of an invalid invocationId. The patch exits with
EXIT_FAILURE in these scenarios.
changeset e5d39c2d858982f15dbd855828a36b3b688f492e
Author: Mathivanan N.P.<mathi.naic...@oracle.com>
Date: Tue, 06 May 2014 18:33:52 -0400
log: saflogtest to return EXIT_FAILURE when SaLogWriteLogCallbackT
fails- v1
[#884] saflogtest is not returning appropriate exit code to the shell
when
SaLogWriteLogCallbackT fails either because of an error reported in the
callback or because of an invalid invocationId. The patch exits with
EXIT_FAILURE in these scenarios.
Complete diffstat:
------------------
osaf/tools/saflog/saflogger/saf_logger.c | 4 ++--
tests/logsv/saflogtest.c | 4 ++--
2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
Testing Commands:
-----------------
Load LOG server such that it returns TRY_AGAIN for writes continously.
Run saflogger to write to an application stream.
For saflogtest, it is a conceptual patch because saflogtest will
continously try for TRY_AGAINs.
Testing, Expected Results:
--------------------------
Load LOG server such that it returns TRY_AGAIN for writes continously.
After trying for ten seconds, when the saflogger exits with
TRY_AGAIN error. The shell exit code should be 1 for failure cases.
Conditions of Submission:
-------------------------
Ack from Lennart.
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 ~/.hgrc file (i.e. username, 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.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Is your legacy SCM system holding you back? Join Perforce May 7 to find out:
• 3 signs your SCM is hindering your productivity
• Requirements for releasing software faster
• Expert tips and advice for migrating your SCM now
http://p.sf.net/sfu/perforce
_______________________________________________
Opensaf-devel mailing list
Opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel
