[devel] [PATCH 0 of 1] Review Request for amfd: Remove asserts from validation routines [#849]

[Gary L. <gar...@de...>]

Summary: amfd: Remove asserts from validation routines [#849]
Review request for Trac Ticket(s): 849 
Peer Reviewer(s): AMF maintainers 
Pull request to: 
Affected branch(es): opensaf-4.3.x 
Development branch: opensaf-4.3.x 

--------------------------------
Impacted area       Impact y/n
--------------------------------
 Docs                    n
 Build system            n
 RPM/packaging           n
 Configuration files     n
 Startup scripts         n
 SAF services            y 
 OpenSAF services        n
 Core libraries          n
 Samples                 n
 Tests                   n
 Other                   n


Comments (indicate scope for each "y" above):
---------------------------------------------

This is the patch for opensaf-4.3.x.

changeset 88b384c6c11b2efacae48f0347ab392f81c5100f
Author:	Gary Lee <gar...@de...>
Date:	Thu, 29 May 2014 13:57:14 +1000

	amfd: Remove asserts from validation routines [#849]

	When an unknown attribute in encountered in various ccb completed callbacks,
	sometimes an assert is called. In other cases, the operation is rejected, or
	ignored.

	This patches replaces the asserts, and instead returns
	SA_AIS_ERR_BAD_OPERATION to the IMMA.

	In addition, some asserts in runtime attribute callbacks have been replaced
	with error messages.


Complete diffstat:
------------------
 osaf/services/saf/avsv/avd/avd_app.c        |  17 ++++++++++++-----
 osaf/services/saf/avsv/avd/avd_comp.c       |   5 +++--
 osaf/services/saf/avsv/avd/avd_compcstype.c |   5 +++--
 osaf/services/saf/avsv/avd/avd_csi.c        |   3 ++-
 osaf/services/saf/avsv/avd/avd_csiattr.c    |   2 +-
 osaf/services/saf/avsv/avd/avd_hlt.c        |  10 +++++++---
 osaf/services/saf/avsv/avd/avd_sg.c         |  10 +++++++---
 osaf/services/saf/avsv/avd/avd_si.c         |   5 +++--
 osaf/services/saf/avsv/avd/avd_su.c         |   8 +++++---
 9 files changed, 43 insertions(+), 22 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      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 ~/.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.