Summary: imm: make version parameter in immutil_xxx non-const [#2830]
Review request for Ticket(s): 2830
Peer Reviewer(s): Hans, Anders W, Lennart, Ravi
Pull request to: *** LIST THE PERSON WITH PUSH ACCESS HERE ***
Affected branch(es): develop, release
Development branch: ticket-2830
Base revision: b3c8028c3312ffe13c815dbe0249947a5c4947dc
Personal repository: git://git.code.sf.net/u/winhvu/review
--------------------------------
Impacted area Impact y/n
--------------------------------
Docs n
Build system n
RPM/packaging n
Configuration files n
Startup scripts n
SAF services n
OpenSAF services n
Core libraries n
Samples n
Tests n
Other y
Comments (indicate scope for each "y" above):
---------------------------------------------
*** EXPLAIN/COMMENT THE PATCH SERIES HERE ***
revision 73e16f9b4eb38a2ff3325f8ae602ab17b9d38740
Author: Vu Minh Nguyen <vu.m.ngu...@dektech.com.au>
Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2018 17:28:22 +0700
imm: make version parameter in immutil_xxx non-const [#2830]
The version in saImmO{m,i}Initialize is input/output parameter and is declared
as non-constant for both IMM OM and OI API according to SAF spec.
But in immutil wrapper library, some are declared as constant and don't update
the in/out version before returning from such wrappers.
This patch makes that parameter non-const and do update the version
before returning from wrapper APIs. Also fix the wrong usage of
these wrapper, passed const version, in some services/applications.
Complete diffstat:
------------------
src/amf/amfd/imm.cc | 11 +++++++----
src/amf/amfnd/util.cc | 3 ++-
src/log/apitest/imm_tstutil.c | 5 ++++-
src/log/apitest/logtest.c | 9 ++++++---
src/log/apitest/logtestfr.c | 6 ++++--
src/log/apitest/tet_log_runtime_cfgobj.c | 3 ++-
src/log/logd/lgs_config.cc | 3 ++-
src/log/logd/lgs_imm.cc | 15 ++++++++++-----
src/log/logd/lgs_imm_gcfg.cc | 7 +++++--
src/osaf/immutil/immutil.c | 20 +++++++++++++++-----
src/osaf/immutil/immutil.h | 6 +++---
src/smf/smfd/SmfAdminState.cc | 4 ++--
src/smf/smfd/SmfExecControlHdl.cc | 3 ++-
13 files changed, 64 insertions(+), 31 deletions(-)
Testing Commands:
-----------------
*** LIST THE COMMAND LINE TOOLS/STEPS TO TEST YOUR CHANGES ***
Testing, Expected Results:
--------------------------
*** PASTE COMMAND OUTPUTS / TEST RESULTS ***
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 ~/.gitconfig file (i.e. user.name, user.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
