Hi Hung, I already acknowledged the patch.
Thanks, Neel. On 2016/08/12 04:51 PM, Neelakanta Reddy wrote: > Hi Hung, > > Reviewed and tested the patch. > Ack. > > /Neel. > > On 2016/08/05 01:59 PM, Hung Nguyen wrote: >> Summary: imm: Use high resolution time measurements [#1704] >> Review request for Trac Ticket(s): 1704 >> Peer Reviewer(s): Zoran, Neel >> Pull request to: >> Affected branch(es): 5.1 >> Development branch: 5.1 >> >> -------------------------------- >> 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): >> --------------------------------------------- >> >> >> changeset c6fef534a014a6e097cb911a773ba8e0604b0d0f >> Author: Hung Nguyen <[email protected]> >> Date: Thu, 04 Aug 2016 14:37:14 +0700 >> >> imm: Use high resolution time measurements for ImmModel [#1704] >> >> Use high resolution time measurements for ImmModel. >> >> changeset cdf23b0da009f16c99723f43c7b69b66b7f94eab >> Author: Hung Nguyen <[email protected]> >> Date: Thu, 04 Aug 2016 15:39:09 +0700 >> >> imm: Use high resolution time measurements for IMMND server [#1704] >> >> This patch just simply gets rid of time_t and uses timespec instead. >> >> For now we don't have the advantages of timespec yet. The >> interval for >> immnd_process_evt is still one second, so we can't check for >> timeout at high >> frequency. >> >> That can be improved in another ticket. >> >> >> Complete diffstat: >> ------------------ >> osaf/libs/common/immsv/include/immsv.h | 8 ++++++++ >> osaf/services/saf/immsv/immnd/ImmModel.cc | 132 >> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> osaf/services/saf/immsv/immnd/ImmSearchOp.cc | 2 +- >> osaf/services/saf/immsv/immnd/ImmSearchOp.hh | 6 +++--- >> osaf/services/saf/immsv/immnd/immnd.h | 16 ---------------- >> osaf/services/saf/immsv/immnd/immnd_cb.h | 12 ++++++------ >> osaf/services/saf/immsv/immnd/immnd_evt.c | 9 +++------ >> osaf/services/saf/immsv/immnd/immnd_main.c | 25 >> ++++++++++++------------- >> osaf/services/saf/immsv/immnd/immnd_proc.c | 55 >> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------------------- >> 9 files changed, 122 insertions(+), 143 deletions(-) >> >> >> Testing Commands: >> ----------------- >> >> >> >> Testing, Expected Results: >> -------------------------- >> >> >> >> Conditions of Submission: >> ------------------------- >> Ack from reviewers. >> >> >> Arch Built Started Linux distro >> ------------------------------------------- >> mips n n >> mips64 n n >> x86 n n >> x86_64 n n >> 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. >> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Opensaf-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel
