Summary: mdstest: identify svcs using svc_id and mds_dest when storing event
info [#2798]
Review request for Ticket(s): 2798
Peer Reviewer(s): Hans, Lennart, Minh
Pull request to: Hans, Lennart, Minh
Affected branch(es): develop
Development branch: ticket-2798
Base revision: b43856b6227e989fa6583edfceea10c0849c130d
Personal repository: git://git.code.sf.net/u/xhoalee/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 y
Other n
NOTE: Patch(es) contain lines longer than 80 characers
Comments (indicate scope for each "y" above):
---------------------------------------------
revision 6d55e14ded3cbe2d093232f1c4ee575b592c89eb
Author: Hoa Le <hoa...@dektech.com.au>
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2018 10:26:11 +0700
mdstest: correct timing issues in mdstest [#2798]
In some bad thread scheduling situations, the API service request
in the testing thread may be executed before the corresponding
event being received on the MDS thread. This will lead to the
unexpected behavior of the service request and cause the failure
in this test case.
This patch helps avoid the above issue by waiting for the expected
event being received on MDS thread before invoking the testing
service request.
revision 1d93a73da8dd8fc575d2fc7a5a46cf025cc801af
Author: Hoa Le <hoa...@dektech.com.au>
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2018 09:45:39 +0700
mdstest: identify svcs using svc_id and mds_dest when storing event info [#2798]
Currently, when updating the last event info, mdstest identify services
using their svc_id. This will cause confusion when several services was
installed with the same svc_id (on different mds_dest-s). If a service
subscribes to this svc_id, the service will retrieve several event info
with the same svc_id. When storing these event info to svcevt array, the
info are overwritten one by one and only the last info will be stored.
This patch helps avoid the above situation by identifying these
services using both their svc_id and mds_dest. This helps the event
info, from different service, be separatedly stored to svcevt array.
subscr_count value will also be updated in accordance with these
event info.
Complete diffstat:
------------------
src/mds/apitest/mdstipc_api.c | 440 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------
src/mds/apitest/mdstipc_conf.c | 164 +++++++++++++--
2 files changed, 456 insertions(+), 148 deletions(-)
Testing Commands:
-----------------
mdstest 4 10
mdstest 4 12
mdstest 5 1
mdstest 5 9
mdstest 10 1
mdstest 10 2
mdstest 14 5
mdstest 14 6
Testing, Expected Results:
--------------------------
No failure appears.
Conditions of Submission:
-------------------------
ACK from reviewer.
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 ~/.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
