Perl 6 - the future is here, just unevenly distributed

IRC log for #gluster-dev, 2013-11-15

| Channels | #gluster-dev index | Today | | Search | Google Search | Plain-Text | summary

All times shown according to UTC.

Time Nick Message
00:40 raghug joined #gluster-dev
02:53 hagarth joined #gluster-dev
02:58 raghug joined #gluster-dev
03:02 bharata-rao joined #gluster-dev
03:21 raghug joined #gluster-dev
03:39 shubhendu joined #gluster-dev
03:41 itisravi joined #gluster-dev
03:51 raghug joined #gluster-dev
03:52 raghug joined #gluster-dev
03:55 ndarshan joined #gluster-dev
03:56 spandit joined #gluster-dev
04:03 mohankumar__ joined #gluster-dev
04:04 hagarth joined #gluster-dev
04:49 kanagaraj joined #gluster-dev
04:54 bala joined #gluster-dev
05:02 kshlm joined #gluster-dev
05:20 ppai joined #gluster-dev
05:32 ababu joined #gluster-dev
05:51 mohankumar__ joined #gluster-dev
06:02 lalatenduM joined #gluster-dev
09:15 ndarshan joined #gluster-dev
09:57 vshankar joined #gluster-dev
11:18 ababu joined #gluster-dev
11:33 itisravi_ joined #gluster-dev
11:55 mohankumar__ hagarth: ping
11:56 hagarth mohankumar__: pong
11:56 mohankumar__ regarding coverity scan for ZF & BD
11:56 mohankumar__ i can send the fix for BD issues
11:56 mohankumar__ but some of the ZF issues are generic and i wonder why they are not reported for existing code
11:57 mohankumar__ i have not used coverity already, coverity scan checks recent commits only?
11:57 mohankumar__ hagarth: ^^
11:57 mohankumar__ for ex,  CID 1128902:  Logically dead code  (DEADCODE)
11:57 mohankumar__ its applicable to almost all functions in client.c
11:57 hagarth mohankumar__: yes, it is checking recent ones
11:58 mohankumar__ hagarth: so i can ignore those defects?
11:58 hagarth let me just check once again
11:58 mohankumar__ if (!frame || !this || !data)
11:58 mohankumar__ goto unwind;
11:58 mohankumar__ unwind:
11:58 mohankumar__ CLIENT_STACK_UNWIND(discard, frame, -1, op_errno, NULL, NULL, NULL);
11:59 mohankumar__ this is typically used in all functions in client-rpc-fops.c
11:59 mohankumar__ if frame is NULL, its better to assert and exit?
11:59 hagarth yeah, that would be better
12:00 mohankumar__ i can add that assert in zerofill code
12:00 hagarth ok, that would be better
12:00 mohankumar__ hagarth: or should we even check for  if (!frame) ?
12:01 mohankumar__ IIUC if frame is NULL, this function would have not invoked at all
12:01 hagarth something like if (!frame) would be better to avoid potential NULL deref warnings
12:01 mohankumar__ similarly in posix all fops check for VALIDATE_OR_GOTO (frame, out);
12:02 mohankumar__ out:
12:02 mohankumar__ STACK_UNWIND_STRICT (opendir, frame, op_ret, op_errno, fd, NULL);
12:02 mohankumar__ so if coverity is run for the full source there will be lots of warnings
12:02 mohankumar__ hagarth: so assert is fine
12:02 hagarth mohankumar__: coverity is also being run for full source
12:03 hagarth we will either clean them up or mark them as false positives at some point of time
12:03 mohankumar__ hagarth: is it possible for you to share the entire full source result?
12:03 hagarth mohankumar__: yes, assert is fine
12:03 hagarth mohankumar__: sure, will send it out on the ML in a bit
12:05 hagarth mohankumar__: done
12:21 mohankumar__ hagarth: thanks, i need a login to view the report?
12:37 hagarth mohankumar__: looks like that
12:57 mohankumar__ is there any non-destructive way to run ./run-tests.sh ?
12:57 mohankumar__ ie without loosing existing gluster volume configuration details
12:57 mohankumar__ its pain every time to recreate the volume after run-tests.sh
13:10 ndarshan joined #gluster-dev
13:20 bala joined #gluster-dev
13:20 hagarth mohankumar__: best to copy out /var/lib/glusterd before running run-tests.sh
13:21 mohankumar__ hagarth: yes, thats what i am also thinking :)
13:21 mohankumar__ btw is it recommended, copying and restoring?
13:24 ira joined #gluster-dev
13:48 hagarth mohankumar__: yes, it is not a problem to copy and restore
13:49 hagarth mohankumar__: we probably can enhance run-tests.sh to do that automatically
13:49 mohankumar__ hagarth: thats great ^^
13:50 mohankumar__ hagarth: while  posting the patches for coverity fixes, can i use BD's bug id or it should be new one?
13:50 hagarth mohankumar__: you can use BD's bug id .. should not be a problem
13:50 mohankumar__ hagarth: thanks!
14:11 kkeithley hagarth: just a tag (v3.5.0qa1)? Not a branch?
14:21 raghug joined #gluster-dev
14:26 hagarth kkeithley: see my other mail on gluster-devel
14:26 hagarth about branching plans
14:31 awheeler joined #gluster-dev
15:12 jbautista|brb joined #gluster-dev
15:26 shubhendu joined #gluster-dev
16:02 lpabon joined #gluster-dev
16:22 lbalbalba joined #gluster-dev
16:36 lbalbalba left #gluster-dev
18:38 tg3 joined #gluster-dev
19:03 Technicool joined #gluster-dev
20:03 davidbierce joined #gluster-dev
20:07 Technicool joined #gluster-dev
20:12 semiosis joined #gluster-dev
20:30 ira joined #gluster-dev
21:59 awheeler_ joined #gluster-dev
22:02 awheeler_ joined #gluster-dev
22:17 awheeler joined #gluster-dev
22:18 davidbierce joined #gluster-dev
22:43 badone joined #gluster-dev

| Channels | #gluster-dev index | Today | | Search | Google Search | Plain-Text | summary