Hi, I am a little bit confused regarding the review of ticket #2209. I was asked to prioritize reviewing of #2209 and I can see that the ticket has status “review” but I cannot find any review request for this ticket. However the patch sent for review for ticket #2214 seems to contain the code Tai Dinh added as a comment in the #2209 ticket? Also the #2214 ticket is in state “unassigned”. Can someone please clarify what the problem is, what patch that solves it and which ticket we are talking about. Also please fix so that ticket #2214 and #2209 gets the correct state.
Thanks Lennart From: Neelakanta Reddy [mailto:reddy.neelaka...@oracle.com] Sent: den 2 december 2016 14:16 To: Tai Chi Dinh <tai.d...@dektech.com.au> Cc: Lennart Lund <lennart.l...@ericsson.com>; Rafael Odzakow <rafael.odza...@ericsson.com>; opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [devel] [PATCH 0 of 1] Review Request for smf:Allow optimization at node level forAddRemove in mergeStepIntoSingle[#2214] Hi Tai, forAddRemove we can have the following cases: 1. only deactivationUnit 2. only activationUnit 3. both For case 1 and 2 we can not optimize for node/Su/Comp. For case 3 we can optimize for node/Su/comp. I think the published patch needs to be corrected. i.e if node/SU/Comp is present in both activation and deactivation then only optimize, otherwise do not optimize. Thanks, Neel. On 2016/12/02 05:44 PM, Tai Chi DINH wrote: Hi Neel, I think we also need to remove any duplication under SU level and Component Level also. Example we have the original campaign that have: - Rolling on SCs - ForModify on SU1, SU2 that are hosted on PLs - ForAddRemoved on SU1, SU2. Which this patch, the result campaign will have AU/DU on SCs/SU1/SU2/SU1/SU2. Which means we have redundant/unnecessary lock/unlock of SU1/SU2 (it's enough to just lock/unlock them only once). How do you think? /Tai Quoting Neelakanta Reddy <reddy.neelaka...@oracle.com<mailto:reddy.neelaka...@oracle.com>>: Hi All, Here the defect no is #2209 not #2214 Thanks, Neel. On 2016/12/02 04:22 PM, reddy.neelaka...@oracle.com<mailto:reddy.neelaka...@oracle.com> wrote: Summary: smf:Allow optimization at node level forAddRemove in mergeStepIntoSingle[#2214] Review request for Trac Ticket(s): 2214 Peer Reviewer(s): Rafael, Lennart, tai Affected branch(es): 5.0.x, 5.1.x, 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): --------------------------------------------- changeset 2becbe07a7f92d70f928e23dcd6b0a6576c8e22a Author: Neelakanta Reddy <reddy.neelaka...@oracle.com<mailto:reddy.neelaka...@oracle.com>> Date: Fri, 02 Dec 2016 16:16:33 +0530 smf:Allow optimization at node level forAddRemove in mergeStepIntoSingle[#2214] Complete diffstat: ------------------ osaf/services/saf/smfsv/smfd/SmfUpgradeProcedure.cc | 40 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 files changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) Testing Commands: ----------------- campaign must contain rolling and singlestep upgrade with AU/SU node level Testing, Expected Results: -------------------------- Campaign should not fail 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. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot _______________________________________________ Opensaf-devel mailing list Opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge<mailto:Opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge>.nethttps://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Opensaf-devel mailing list Opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel
