Ack. Pushed.

   Alex

   On 10/11/2018 07:37 AM, Meenakshi TK wrote:
     __________________________________________________________________

   NOTICE: This email was received from an EXTERNAL sender
     __________________________________________________________________

   Summary: plm: Add missing test cases of saPlmtInitialize() in plm
   apitest [#2938]
   Review request for Ticket(s): 2938
   Peer Reviewer(s): Alex, Mathi
   Pull request to: Alex, Mathi
   Affected branch(es): develop
   Development branch: ticket-2938
   Base revision: cad806745a2eb96024ff18081ccf6d208b0fb93b
   Personal repository: [1]git://git.code.sf.net/u/meenatk-hasoln/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):
   ---------------------------------------------
   *** EXPLAIN/COMMENT THE PATCH SERIES HERE ***
   revision 1c0db32afb8e39e8c9869f72aecd70d4ba4206a2
   Author: Meenakshi TK [2]<[email protected]>
   Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2018 16:57:48 +0530
   plm: Add missing test cases of saPlmtInitialize() in plm apitest
   [#2938]
   Complete diffstat:
   ------------------
   src/plm/apitest/test_saPlmInitialize.c | 57
   ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
   1 file changed, 57 insertions(+)
   Testing Commands:
   -----------------
   The test cases were run by the command: "./plmtest 1" where 1 is the
   test_suite number for saPlmInitialize() API.
   Testing, Expected Results:
   --------------------------
   All the test cases have passed.The logs for the added test cases are
   below:
   Received value:'7' Expected value:'7' 7 PASSED SA_AIS_ERR_INVALID_PARAM
   - NULL pointer to handle
   Received value:'7' Expected value:'7' 8 PASSED SA_AIS_ERR_INVALID_PARAM
   - NULL pointer to version
   Received value:'7' Expected value:'7' 9 PASSED SA_AIS_ERR_INVALID_PARAM
   - NULL pointer to handle and uninitialised callbacks
   Received value:'7' Expected value:'7' 10 PASSED
   SA_AIS_ERR_INVALID_PARAM - NULL pointer to handle and version
   Received value:'7' Expected value:'7' 11 PASSED
   SA_AIS_ERR_INVALID_PARAM - NULL pointer to version and uninitialised
   callbacks
   Received value:'7' Expected value:'7' 12 PASSED
   SA_AIS_ERR_INVALID_PARAM - NULL pointer to handle, version and
   callbacks
   Conditions of Submission:
   -------------------------
   Ack from maintainer
   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.

References

   1. https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/94nYCR6Lz6C62n0sNJ-xK
   2. mailto:[email protected]

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

_______________________________________________
Opensaf-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel

Reply via email to