Hi Anders,

Comments inline.

On Wednesday 16 March 2016 05:22 PM, Anders Widell wrote:
> Ack with two comments:
>
> 1) I think we should use nanosecond resolution for time measurements. 
> As per recommendation from Zoran, this could be implemented as a 
> separate ticket, though.
This can be taken as separate defect. #1617 is enhancement changing from 
system time to monotonic time.
>
> 2) Don't add common helper functions in osaf_time.h for reading the 
> system time with a low resolution (seconds). Instead, move these 
> helper functions to ImmModel and remove them after the ticket 
> mentioned above has been implemented.
>
The reason for adding helper function is osaf_time.h is to have a 
general function which may be used by other services in OpenSAF.
If the helper function is not much helpful generally, it will be moved 
to ImmModel.

Thanks,
Neel.
> regards,
> Anders Widell
>
> On 03/16/2016 08:36 AM, [email protected] wrote:
>> Summary:imm: changing from system time to monotonic time [#1617]
>> Review request for Trac Ticket(s): 1617
>> Peer Reviewer(s): Zoran, Anders, Hung
>> Affected branch(es): latest(5.0)
>> Development branch: latest
>>
>> --------------------------------
>> Impacted area       Impact y/n
>> --------------------------------
>>   Docs                    n
>>   Build system            n
>>   RPM/packaging           n
>>   Configuration files     n
>>   Startup scripts         n
>>   SAF services            n
>>   OpenSAF services        y
>>   Core libraries          n
>>   Samples                 n
>>   Tests                   n
>>   Other                   n
>>
>>
>> Comments (indicate scope for each "y" above):
>> ---------------------------------------------
>>
>> changeset 6e89be2a550655417988c77be834e6dfe13349a6
>> Author:    Neelakanta Reddy
>> Date:    Wed, 16 Mar 2016 12:59:21 +0530
>>
>>     imm: changing from system time to monotonic time [#1617]
>>
>>
>> Complete diffstat:
>> ------------------
>>   osaf/libs/core/common/include/osaf_time.h    |  20 
>> ++++++++++++++++++++
>>   osaf/services/saf/immsv/immnd/ImmModel.cc    |  29 
>> ++++++++++++++++-------------
>>   osaf/services/saf/immsv/immnd/ImmSearchOp.hh |   3 ++-
>>   osaf/services/saf/immsv/immnd/immnd_evt.c    |   7 ++++---
>>   osaf/services/saf/immsv/immnd/immnd_proc.c   |   6 ++++--
>>   5 files changed, 46 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
>>
>>
>> Testing Commands:
>> -----------------
>> set, the OI timeout to a higher value and try to chnage the
>> system time.
>>
>> Testing, Expected Results:
>> --------------------------
>> with this patch, the timeout should take number of seconds
>> that elapsed, rather than the sytem time seconds.
>>
>> 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.
>>
>


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Transform Data into Opportunity.
Accelerate data analysis in your applications with
Intel Data Analytics Acceleration Library.
Click to learn more.
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=278785231&iu=/4140
_______________________________________________
Opensaf-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel

Reply via email to