Hi Vu,
One more point, this is always reproducible ,
I was running /usr/bin/logtest on active node only .
Let us investigate why osaflogd core dumped
============================================================================================
SC-1:~ # /etc/init.d/opensafd status
safSISU=safSu=SC-1\,safSg=NoRed\,safApp=OpenSAF,safSi=NoRed1,safApp=OpenSAF
saAmfSISUHAState=ACTIVE(1)
safSISU=safSu=SC-1\,safSg=2N\,safApp=OpenSAF,safSi=SC-2N,safApp=OpenSAF
saAmfSISUHAState=ACTIVE(1)
safSISU=safSu=PL-3\,safSg=NoRed\,safApp=OpenSAF,safSi=NoRed2,safApp=OpenSAF
saAmfSISUHAState=ACTIVE(1)
safSISU=safSu=PL-4\,safSg=NoRed\,safApp=OpenSAF,safSi=NoRed3,safApp=OpenSAF
saAmfSISUHAState=ACTIVE(1)
safSISU=safSu=SC-2\,safSg=NoRed\,safApp=OpenSAF,safSi=NoRed4,safApp=OpenSAF
saAmfSISUHAState=ACTIVE(1)
safSISU=safSu=SC-2\,safSg=2N\,safApp=OpenSAF,safSi=SC-2N,safApp=OpenSAF
saAmfSISUHAState=STANDBY(2)
SC-1:~ #
SC-1:~ #
SC-1:~ # gdb /usr/bin/logtest
GNU gdb (GDB) SUSE (7.3-0.6.1)
Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
0x000055555556929a in read_and_compare.isra.7 () at
src/log/apitest/tet_LogOiOps.c:1891
1891 src/log/apitest/tet_LogOiOps.c: No such file or directory.
in src/log/apitest/tet_LogOiOps.c
(gdb)
Feb 22 12:14:03 SC-2 osafamfnd[4200]: NO
'safComp=LOG,safSu=SC-2,safSg=2N,safApp=OpenSAF' faulted due to
'avaDown' : Recovery is 'nodeFailfast'
Feb 22 12:14:03 SC-2 osafamfnd[4200]: ER
safComp=LOG,safSu=SC-2,safSg=2N,safApp=OpenSAF Faulted due to:avaDown
Recovery is:nodeFailfast
Feb 22 12:14:03 SC-2 osafamfnd[4200]: Rebooting OpenSAF NodeId = 131599
EE Name = , Reason: Component faulted: recovery is node failfast,
OwnNodeId = 131599, SupervisionTime = 60
Feb 22 12:14:04 SC-2 opensaf_reboot: Rebooting local node; timeout=60
============================================================================================
On 2/22/2017 12:05 PM, A V Mahesh wrote:
> Hi Vu,
>
>
> On 2/22/2017 11:52 AM, Vu Minh Nguyen wrote:
>> Hi Mahesh,
>>
>> Have a code fault in uml test, and other one in checkpoint.
> [AVM] This is Normal Suse 11 VM ( not UML).
>> I have just updated the code. Please re-apply for #3 and #4 patches.
> [AVM] is these new patch has function changes or only test code changes ?
>> Note that, test case #14 of suite 17 should be run on active node, otherwise
>> getting failed.
> [AVM] Segmentation fault of /usr/bin/logtest Not a big issue ,
> we need to debug why osaflogd core dumped and it is critical
>> I will put condition check to that test case later.
>
> -AVM
>
>
>> Regards, Vu
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: A V Mahesh [mailto:[email protected]]
>>> Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2017 12:16 PM
>>> To: Vu Minh Nguyen <[email protected]>;
>>> [email protected]; [email protected]
>>> Cc: [email protected]
>>> Subject: Re: [PATCH 0 of 3] Review Request for log: add alternative
>>> destinations of log records [#2258] V4
>>>
>>> Hi Vu,
>>>
>>> Thanks ,
>>>
>>> While testing /usr/bin/logtest , SC-2 standby osaflogd core dumped and
>>> /usr/bin/logtest on SC-1 Active
>>> got Segmentation fault , am I missing any other patch ( i am using
>>> devel published patch only )
>>>
>>> Following patches i am using :
>>>
>>> 1) #2293 (sent by Anders Widel, but not yet pushed)
>>> 2) #2258 (v2, sent by Lennart, but not yet pushed yet)
>>> 3) #2258 (v4, sent by Vu, but not yet pushed yet)
>>>
>>> ==============================================================
>>> ========================================
>>>
>>>
>>> Core was generated by `/usr/lib64/opensaf/osaflogd'.
>>> Program terminated with signal 11, Segmentation fault.
>>> #0 ckpt_proc_cfg_stream(lgs_cb*, void*) () at
>>> src/log/logd/lgs_mbcsv.cc:2195
>>> 2195 src/log/logd/lgs_mbcsv.cc: No such file or directory.
>>> in src/log/logd/lgs_mbcsv.cc
>>> (gdb) bt
>>> #0 ckpt_proc_cfg_stream(lgs_cb*, void*) () at
>>> src/log/logd/lgs_mbcsv.cc:2195
>>> #1 0x00007f12c3e22960 in ckpt_decode_log_struct(lgs_cb*,
>>> ncs_mbcsv_cb_arg*, void*, void*, unsigned int (*)(edu_hdl_tag*,
>>> edu_tkn_tag*, void*, unsigned int*, edu_buf_env_tag*, EDP_OP_TYPE,
>>> EDU_ERR*)) () at src/log/logd/lgs_mbcsv.cc:950
>>> #2 0x00007f12c3e240dc in ckpt_decode_async_update(lgs_cb*,
>>> ncs_mbcsv_cb_arg*) () at src/log/logd/lgs_mbcsv.cc:1086
>>> #3 0x00007f12c3e26941 in mbcsv_callback(ncs_mbcsv_cb_arg*) () at
>>> src/log/logd/lgs_mbcsv.cc:880
>>> #4 0x00007f12c2f25596 in ncs_mbscv_rcv_decode () from
>>> /usr/lib/../lib64/libopensaf_core.so.0
>>> #5 0x00007f12c2f25766 in ncs_mbcsv_rcv_async_update () from
>>> /usr/lib/../lib64/libopensaf_core.so.0
>>> #6 0x00007f12c2f2c370 in mbcsv_process_events () from
>>> /usr/lib/../lib64/libopensaf_core.so.0
>>> #7 0x00007f12c2f2c4db in mbcsv_hdl_dispatch_all () from
>>> /usr/lib/../lib64/libopensaf_core.so.0
>>> #8 0x00007f12c2f26ce2 in mbcsv_process_dispatch_request () at
>>> src/mbc/mbcsv_api.c:423
>>> #9 0x00007f12c3e2396e in lgs_mbcsv_dispatch(unsigned int) () at
>>> src/log/logd/lgs_mbcsv.cc:327
>>> #10 0x00007f12c3e009f2 in main () at src/log/logd/lgs_main.cc:583
>>> (gdb)
>>>
>>> ==============================================================
>>> ========================================
>>>
>>> Feb 22 10:37:06 SC-1 osafimmnd[4020]: NO Invalid error reported
>>> implementer 'safLogService', Ccb 161 will be aborted
>>> Feb 22 10:37:06 SC-1 osafimmnd[4020]: NO Ccb 161 aborted in COMPLETED
>>> processing (validation)
>>> Feb 22 10:37:06 SC-1 osafimmnd[4020]: NO Ccb 161 ABORTED (immcfg_SC-
>>> 1_5394)
>>> Add values Fail
>>>
>>> Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
>>> 0x000055555556929a in read_and_compare.isra.7 () at
>>> src/log/apitest/tet_LogOiOps.c:1891
>>> 1891 src/log/apitest/tet_LogOiOps.c: No such file or directory.
>>> in src/log/apitest/tet_LogOiOps.c
>>> (gdb) Feb 22 10:37:07 SC-1 sshd[5298]: Accepted keyboard-interactive/pam
>>> for root from 10.176.178.22 port 51945 ssh2
>>> bt
>>> #0 0x000055555556929a in read_and_compare.isra.7 () at
>>> src/log/apitest/tet_LogOiOps.c:1891
>>> #1 0x0000555555569bbb in
>>> check_logRecordDestinationConfigurationEmpty
>>> () at src/log/apitest/tet_LogOiOps.c:2179
>>> #2 0x0000555555573495 in run_test_case ()
>>> #3 0x0000555555573934 in test_run ()
>>> #4 0x000055555555c7cd in main () at src/log/apitest/logtest.c:569
>>> (gdb)
>>>
>>> ==============================================================
>>> ========================================
>>>
>>> -AVM
>>>
>>> On 2/22/2017 9:48 AM, Vu Minh Nguyen wrote:
>>>> Hi Mahesh,
>>>>
>>>> I send them in attachment instead, and name them in the order.
>>>> I just pull the latest code, and apply them without getting any hunk
>> error.
>>>> Please try with them, and let me know if you see any problem.
>>>>
>>>> Regards, Vu
>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: A V Mahesh [mailto:[email protected]]
>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2017 11:09 AM
>>>>> To: Vu Minh Nguyen <[email protected]>;
>>>>> [email protected]; [email protected]
>>>>> Cc: [email protected]
>>>>> Subject: Re: [PATCH 0 of 3] Review Request for log: add alternative
>>>>> destinations of log records [#2258] V4
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Vu,
>>>>>
>>>>> I did follow that still i get Hunk #2 FAILED even on today's staging
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>> ==============================================================
>>>>> ==================
>>>>>
>>>>> [root@dhcp-hyd-scp-5fl-10-176-177-96 staging]# patch -p1 <2293
>>>>> patching file src/base/Makefile.am
>>>>> Hunk #1 succeeded at 33 (offset 1 line).
>>>>> Hunk #3 succeeded at 183 (offset 1 line).
>>>>> patching file src/base/file_descriptor.cc
>>>>> patching file src/base/file_descriptor.h
>>>>> patching file src/base/tests/unix_socket_test.cc
>>>>> patching file src/base/unix_client_socket.cc
>>>>> patching file src/base/unix_server_socket.cc
>>>>> patching file src/base/unix_socket.cc
>>>>> patching file src/base/unix_socket.h
>>>>>
>>>>> [root@dhcp-hyd-scp-5fl-10-176-177-96 staging]# patch -p1 <2258-1
>>>>> patching file src/log/Makefile.am
>>>>> Hunk #1 succeeded at 71 (offset -1 lines).
>>>>> 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
>>>>> patching file src/log/logd/lgs_imm.cc
>>>>> Hunk #1 FAILED at 45.
>>>>> Hunk #2 succeeded at 235 (offset -1 lines).
>>>>> Hunk #3 FAILED at 877.
>>>>> Hunk #4 succeeded at 1273 (offset -20 lines).
>>>>> Hunk #5 succeeded at 1404 (offset -1 lines).
>>>>> Hunk #6 succeeded at 1449 (offset -20 lines).
>>>>> Hunk #7 succeeded at 2032 (offset -1 lines).
>>>>> Hunk #8 FAILED at 2181.
>>>>> Hunk #9 succeeded at 2271 (offset -54 lines).
>>>>> Hunk #10 succeeded at 2387 (offset -1 lines).
>>>>> Hunk #11 succeeded at 2377 (offset -54 lines).
>>>>> Hunk #12 succeeded at 2478 (offset -1 lines).
>>>>> Hunk #13 succeeded at 2684 (offset -54 lines).
>>>>> Hunk #14 succeeded at 2821 (offset -1 lines).
>>>>> 3 out of 14 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file
>>>>> src/log/logd/lgs_imm.cc.rej
>>>>> patching file src/log/logd/lgs_main.cc
>>>>> patching file src/log/logd/lgs_mbcsv.cc
>>>>> patching file src/log/logd/lgs_mbcsv.h
>>>>> patching file src/log/logd/lgs_mbcsv_v5.cc
>>>>> Hunk #3 succeeded at 133 (offset -1 lines).
>>>>> patching file src/log/logd/lgs_mbcsv_v7.cc
>>>>> patching file src/log/logd/lgs_mbcsv_v7.h
>>>>> patching file src/log/logd/lgs_stream.cc
>>>>> patching file src/log/logd/lgs_stream.h
>>>>> patching file src/log/logd/lgs_util.cc
>>>>> patching file src/log/logd/lgs_util.h
>>>>>
>>>>> [root@dhcp-hyd-scp-5fl-10-176-177-96 staging]# patch -p1 <2258-2
>>>>> patching file src/log/Makefile.am
>>>>> Hunk #1 succeeded at 180 (offset -3 lines).
>>>>> patching file src/log/apitest/tet_LogOiOps.c
>>>>> Hunk #1 FAILED at 1923.
>>>>> Hunk #2 FAILED at 1979.
>>>>> Hunk #3 FAILED at 2067.
>>>>> Hunk #4 FAILED at 2094.
>>>>> 4 out of 4 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file
>>>>> src/log/apitest/tet_LogOiOps.c.rej
>>>>> patching file src/log/apitest/tet_cfg_destination.c
>>>>>
>>>>> [root@dhcp-hyd-scp-5fl-10-176-177-96 staging]# patch -p1 <2258-3
>>>>> patching file src/log/Makefile
>>>>> patching file src/log/Makefile.am
>>>>> Hunk #1 succeeded at 80 (offset -1 lines).
>>>>> Hunk #2 succeeded at 217 (offset -2 lines).
>>>>> patching file src/log/tests/Makefile
>>>>> patching file src/log/tests/lgs_dest_test.cc
>>>>> [root@dhcp-hyd-scp-5fl-10-176-177-96 staging]# vi
>>>>> src/log/apitest/tet_LogOiOps.c.rej
>>>>> [root@dhcp-hyd-scp-5fl-10-176-177-96 staging]#
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>> ==============================================================
>>>>> ========================
>>>>>
>>>>> -AVM
>>>>>
>>>>> On 2/21/2017 3:53 PM, Vu Minh Nguyen wrote:
>>>>>> 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:[email protected]]
>>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2017 5:10 PM
>>>>>>> To: Vu Minh Nguyen <[email protected]>;
>>>>>>> [email protected]; [email protected]
>>>>>>> Cc: [email protected]
>>>>>>> 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 <[email protected]>
>>>>>>>> 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 <[email protected]>
>>>>>>>> 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 <[email protected]>
>>>>>>>> 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
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel
