Dmitri Pal wrote:
Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> On 12/23/2009 03:59 PM, Dmitri Pal wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> * I am not resending the COLLECTION patch. Ticket #350 has been open to
>> foster further discussion about the issue.
>> * The refarray is now made common and the attached (or should I say
>> attacked? :-) ) patch addresses ALL issues that have been brought up.
>>
>> The ELAPI patch will be sent later. I need to update it to factor in the
>> change in the location of the ref-array.
>> Also I checked that the patch will get much smaller if I ask it to track
>> deletes or moves/copies.
>> It actually gets twice smaller.
>>
>> It is really not that big (read bad :-) ). It has about 2000-3000 lines
>> of new code thanks for async processing (not that I wanted it to happen
>> :-) )...
>> But all the rest is just due to the cleanup. For example the module
>> elapi_dispatcher had too many functions that were not related to
>> dispatcher so they got moved around to other modules.
>> Same with elapi_sink, elapi_log etc.
>> Now the code is much better arranged in layers and objects.
>>
>> Also the wiki is your helper in review. It has now the write up about
>> ELAPI that I created before I submitted this patch last time.
>>
>
>> Happy holidays!
>> Talk to you next year!
>>
>> Dmitri
>>
> Nack.
>
> Line 282 should be:
> printf("Element = %u\n", (unsigned int)ra->elsize);
> Otherwise you're throwing a compilation warning:
>
> ../../../common/refarray/ref_array.c: In function ref_array_debug:
> ../../../common/refarray/ref_array.c:282: warning: format %u expects
> type unsigned int, but argument 2 has type size_t
>
>
Interesting. It does not produce this warning on my system...
I made the change anyways though I have seen this issue before and then
it went away.
May be it was different part of code.
> ref_array_len is still completely broken. Now, instead of returning 0 on
> error, you're returning 22. This is even worse.
>
> Please either use the approach I showed in an earlier email, or return 0
> and set errno=EINVAL:
>
> if (!ra) {
> TRACE_ERROR_STRING("Uninitialized argument.", "");
> errno=EINVAL;
> return 0;
> }
>
> This might be the better approach for you, since if the caller doesn't
> care about an error, they can just ignore errno.
>
>
>
Uhhhh. Good catch!
Forgot to mention that the patch was attached.
> Almost there. :)
>
>
_______________________________________________
sssd-devel mailing list
sssd-devel(a)lists.fedorahosted.org
https://fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/sssd-devel
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
sssd-devel mailing list
sssd-devel(a)lists.fedorahosted.org
https://fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/sssd-devel
--
Thank you,
Dmitri Pal
Engineering Manager IPA project,
Red Hat Inc.
-------------------------------
Looking to carve out IT costs?
www.redhat.com/carveoutcosts/