Hi Mahesh, As I has mentioned in below: > > To run the test, this patch has dependent on following patches: > > 1) #2293 (sent by Anders Widel, but not yet pushed) > > 2) #2258 (v2, sent by Lennart, but not yet pushed yet)
So, you need to apply #2293 first, then #2258 which sent by Lennart yesterday, then mine. Regards, Vu > -----Original Message----- > From: A V Mahesh [mailto:mahesh.va...@oracle.com] > Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2017 5:10 PM > To: Vu Minh Nguyen <vu.m.ngu...@dektech.com.au>; > lennart.l...@ericsson.com; canh.v.tru...@dektech.com.au > Cc: opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > Subject: Re: [PATCH 0 of 3] Review Request for log: add alternative > destinations of log records [#2258] V4 > > Hi Vu, > > Is this applies on top of log #2146 - V4 , I see both #tickets has > version changes ? > > in which order i need to apply ( #2146 & #2258 ) or (#2258 & #2146). > > ========================================================= > > patching file src/log/Makefile.am > Hunk #1 FAILED at 72. > Hunk #2 FAILED at 120. > 2 out of 2 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file src/log/Makefile.am.rej > patching file src/log/config/logsv_classes.xml > Hunk #1 FAILED at 147. > 1 out of 1 hunk FAILED -- saving rejects to file > src/log/config/logsv_classes.xml.rej > patching file src/log/logd/lgs_config.cc > Hunk #1 succeeded at 35 (offset -5 lines). > Hunk #2 FAILED at 705. > Hunk #3 FAILED at 971. > 2 out of 3 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file > src/log/logd/lgs_config.cc.rej > patching file src/log/logd/lgs_config.h > Hunk #1 FAILED at 304. > 1 out of 1 hunk FAILED -- saving rejects to file > src/log/logd/lgs_config.h.rej > patching file src/log/logd/lgs_dest.cc > patching file src/log/logd/lgs_dest.h > patching file src/log/logd/lgs_evt.cc > Hunk #1 FAILED at 1. > Hunk #2 succeeded at 30 with fuzz 2 (offset 2 lines). > Hunk #3 succeeded at 1282 (offset 45 lines). > Hunk #4 succeeded at 1300 (offset 2 lines). > 1 out of 4 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file > src/log/logd/lgs_evt.cc.rej > > ============================================================== > === > > -AVM > > > On 2/21/2017 3:03 PM, Vu Minh Nguyen wrote: > > Summary: log: add alternative destinations of log records [#2258] > > Review request for Trac Ticket(s): #2258 > > Peer Reviewer(s): Lennart, Canh, Mahesh > > Pull request to: <<LIST THE PERSON WITH PUSH ACCESS HERE>> > > 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 n > > OpenSAF services y > > Core libraries n > > Samples n > > Tests y > > Other n > > > > > > Comments (indicate scope for each "y" above): > > --------------------------------------------- > > To run the test, this patch has dependent on following patches: > > 1) #2293 (sent by Anders Widel, but not yet pushed) > > 2) #2258 (v2, sent by Lennart, but not yet pushed yet) > > > > changeset d74aaf3025c99cade3165a15831124548f4d85bd > > Author: Vu Minh Nguyen <vu.m.ngu...@dektech.com.au> > > Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2017 14:36:00 +0700 > > > > log: add alternative destinations of log records [#2258] > > > > Here are major info, detailed info will be added to PR doc soon. 1) > Add > > attribute "saLogRecordDestination" to log stream. 2) Add Local > socket > > destintion handler 3) Integrate into first increment made by Lennart > > > > changeset 4bae27a478c235df3058f43c92d3a5483233b01d > > Author: Vu Minh Nguyen <vu.m.ngu...@dektech.com.au> > > Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2017 15:07:09 +0700 > > > > log: add UML test case to verify alternative destination [#2258] > > > > Major changes: 1) Modify Lennart's test cases because enhancing > destination > > configuration validation rules. 2) Add test suite #17 to verify > alternative > > destination > > > > changeset bc375725fed22bb4f8cb3ae3df5f96fb9d281efb > > Author: Vu Minh Nguyen <vu.m.ngu...@dektech.com.au> > > Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2017 17:22:13 +0700 > > > > log: add unit tests to verify interfaces provided by destination > handler > > [#2258] > > > > Unit tests to verify major interfaces: 1) CfgDestination() 2) > > WriteToDestination() > > > > > > Added Files: > > ------------ > > src/log/apitest/tet_cfg_destination.c > > src/log/logd/lgs_dest.cc > > src/log/logd/lgs_dest.h > > src/log/logd/lgs_mbcsv_v7.cc > > src/log/logd/lgs_mbcsv_v7.h > > src/log/tests/lgs_dest_test.cc > > src/log/tests/Makefile > > > > > > Complete diffstat: > > ------------------ > > src/log/Makefile | 4 + > > src/log/Makefile.am | 31 +++++- > > src/log/apitest/tet_LogOiOps.c | 8 +- > > src/log/apitest/tet_cfg_destination.c | 483 > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > src/log/config/logsv_classes.xml | 7 +- > > src/log/logd/lgs_config.cc | 169 > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--- > > src/log/logd/lgs_config.h | 3 +- > > src/log/logd/lgs_dest.cc | 707 > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > +++++++++++++++++ > > src/log/logd/lgs_dest.h | 576 > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > src/log/logd/lgs_evt.cc | 33 ++++++ > > src/log/logd/lgs_imm.cc | 202 > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------ > > src/log/logd/lgs_main.cc | 8 + > > src/log/logd/lgs_mbcsv.cc | 103 ++++++++++++++++++- > > src/log/logd/lgs_mbcsv.h | 6 +- > > src/log/logd/lgs_mbcsv_v5.cc | 10 + > > src/log/logd/lgs_mbcsv_v7.cc | 177 > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > src/log/logd/lgs_mbcsv_v7.h | 67 +++++++++++++ > > src/log/logd/lgs_stream.cc | 60 +++++++++++- > > src/log/logd/lgs_stream.h | 16 +++ > > src/log/logd/lgs_util.cc | 63 ++++++++++++ > > src/log/logd/lgs_util.h | 11 +- > > src/log/tests/Makefile | 20 +++ > > src/log/tests/lgs_dest_test.cc | 209 > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > 23 files changed, 2896 insertions(+), 77 deletions(-) > > > > > > Testing Commands: > > ----------------- > > Run UML test suite #17 > > > > > > Testing, Expected Results: > > -------------------------- > > All test passed > > > > > > Conditions of Submission: > > ------------------------- > > <<HOW MANY DAYS BEFORE PUSHING, CONSENSUS ETC>> > > > > > > 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. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 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.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel
