Hi Minh,

Ack.

I have not done a very deep analyze of this I assume it's the same code that 
has already been tested for some time and that there are no significant changes 
(and that I have reviewed once). Please tell me if there are any changes that 
you think I should take a closer look at.
I have applied all the patches, built and run the legacy tests in the 
non-resilience configuration and all tests PASS.

Regards
Lennart

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Minh Hon Chau [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: den 1 mars 2016 08:30
> To: Lennart Lund; [email protected]; Vu Minh Nguyen; Minh
> Chau H
> Cc: [email protected]
> Subject: [PATCH 0 of 5] Review Request for Add cloud resilience support
> [#1180] V2
> 
> Summary: ntf: Add cloud resilience support [#1180] V2
> Review request for Trac Ticket(s): 1180
> Peer Reviewer(s): Lennart, Praveen, Vu
> Pull request to: NTF maintainers
> Affected branch(es): default
> Development branch: default
> 
> --------------------------------
> 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):
> ---------------------------------------------
> This V2 has revised comments:
> - Update description of checkNtfServerState
> - Not using conditional operator in ntfa_mds_svc_evt
> - Update Unsubscribe() ReadFinalize() aligned with README
> - Add lock/unlock ntfa_cb.cb_lock for client recovery
> - Update ntftest options: -ve is for tag mode only, -vpe works
> 
> 
> changeset 884d1bdbea715fbc81941a0941c2d3f799a4395e
> Author:       Minh Hon Chau <[email protected]>
> Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2016 18:25:15 +1100
> 
>       NTF: Add support cloud resilience for NTF libs common [#1180]
> 
>       The patch contains support for cloud resilience feature in NTF
> libs common
>       which are mostly used in Agent code
> 
> changeset 6d941afbcd475e1ecf58c6f9586e5ff60a7a3319
> Author:       Minh Hon Chau <[email protected]>
> Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2016 18:26:53 +1100
> 
>       NTF: Add support cloud resilience for NTF Agent [#1180] V2
> 
>       The patch contains support for cloud resilience feature in NTF
> Agent code.
>       Please refer README.HYDRA for content of the changes
> 
> changeset ddd2369c000c3648466c06b8babad4b5884a0058
> Author:       Minh Hon Chau <[email protected]>
> Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2016 18:27:03 +1100
> 
>       NTF: Add wrapper for usage of NTF API in ntftools to handle
> TRY_AGAIN
>       [#1180]
> 
>       Since NTF support the SC outage which the NTF client has to
> handle TRY_AGAIN
>       return code, the patch adds wrapper for APIs being used in
> ntftools that
>       shall receives TRY_AGAIN when both SCs are down.
> 
> changeset 67286bb9852bcfde837c009801826202f2905a5f
> Author:       Minh Hon Chau <[email protected]>
> Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2016 18:27:09 +1100
> 
>       NTF: Add new README file for description of cloud resilience
> support [#1180]
>       V2
> 
>       Add description regarding general solution and API
> implementation for cloud
>       resilience support in NTF
> 
> changeset ad9d91747c80faf1defd86a539f6238a997150b0
> Author:       Minh Hon Chau <[email protected]>
> Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2016 18:27:18 +1100
> 
>       NTF: Add tests for NTF cloud resilience feature [#1180] V2
> 
>       The patch adds new test cases to ntftest for cloud resilience
> feature.
> 
> 
> Complete diffstat:
> ------------------
>  osaf/libs/agents/saf/ntfa/ntfa.h              |    31 +-
>  osaf/libs/agents/saf/ntfa/ntfa_api.c          |   678
> +++++++++++++++++++++++------
>  osaf/libs/agents/saf/ntfa/ntfa_mds.c          |    14 +-
>  osaf/libs/agents/saf/ntfa/ntfa_util.c         |   465 +++++++++++++++++++-
>  osaf/libs/common/ntfsv/include/ntfsv_mem.h    |     7 +
>  osaf/libs/common/ntfsv/include/ntfsv_msg.h    |     1 +
>  osaf/libs/common/ntfsv/ntfsv_mem.c            |   159 ++++++
>  osaf/services/saf/ntfsv/README.HYDRA          |   111 ++++
>  osaf/tools/safntf/include/ntfclient.h         |    25 +
>  osaf/tools/safntf/ntfread/ntfread.c           |    16 +-
>  osaf/tools/safntf/ntfsend/ntfsend.c           |    24 +-
>  osaf/tools/safntf/ntfsubscribe/ntfsubscribe.c |    22 +-
>  osaf/tools/safntf/src/ntfclient.c             |   158 ++++++
>  tests/ntfsv/Makefile.am                       |     4 +-
>  tests/ntfsv/tet_ntf.h                         |     4 +-
>  tests/ntfsv/tet_ntf_api_wrapper.c             |   438 +++++++++++++++++++
>  tests/ntfsv/tet_ntf_common.c                  |    67 ++
>  tests/ntfsv/tet_ntf_common.h                  |   187 ++++++++
>  tests/ntfsv/tet_ntf_main.c                    |   154 ++++++-
>  tests/ntfsv/tet_scOutage_reinitializeHandle.c |  1023
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  20 files changed, 3385 insertions(+), 203 deletions(-)
> 
> 
> Testing Commands:
> -----------------
> Run all ntftest test cases
> 
> 
> Testing, Expected Results:
> --------------------------
> All pass
> 
> 
> Conditions of Submission:
> -------------------------
> ack from reviewers
> 
> 
> 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.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Site24x7 APM Insight: Get Deep Visibility into Application Performance
APM + Mobile APM + RUM: Monitor 3 App instances at just $35/Month
Monitor end-to-end web transactions and take corrective actions now
Troubleshoot faster and improve end-user experience. Signup Now!
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=272487151&iu=/4140
_______________________________________________
Opensaf-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel

Reply via email to