From: Ben Pfaff <blp@nicira.com>
Date: Fri, 5 Aug 2011 22:56:05 +0000 (-0700)
Subject: ovsdb: Correct specification inconsistency between "lock" and "assert".
X-Git-Tag: v1.3.0~479
X-Git-Url: http://git.onelab.eu/?a=commitdiff_plain;h=454ec971d79a921e2e97516ddb9c725d0cfa607d;hp=51cb6e0c654e0954e12c8f171b5215ccad6185eb;p=sliver-openvswitch.git

ovsdb: Correct specification inconsistency between "lock" and "assert".

The "lock" request requires the lock name to be an <id> but it is shown as
<string> in the "assert" operation.  This corrects the "assert"
specification and fixes the suggested naming convention (since ":" is not
valid in an <id>).

This commit also updates the implementation to match the specification.

Reported-by: Jeremy Stribling <strib@nicira.com>
---

diff --git a/ovsdb/SPECS b/ovsdb/SPECS
index e2898c2f0..5bdb9741d 100644
--- a/ovsdb/SPECS
+++ b/ovsdb/SPECS
@@ -682,7 +682,7 @@ The "locked" and "stolen" notifications (see below) report
 asynchronous changes to ownership.
 
 The scope of a lock is a database server, not a database hosted by
-that server.  A naming convention, such as "<db-name>:<lock-name>",
+that server.  A naming convention, such as "<db-name>__<lock-name>",
 can effectively limit the scope of a lock to a particular database.
 
 locked
@@ -1300,7 +1300,7 @@ assert
 Request object members:
 
     "op": "assert"                     required
-    "lock": <string>                   required
+    "lock": <id>                       required
 
 Result object members:
 
diff --git a/ovsdb/execution.c b/ovsdb/execution.c
index 9e3a8d07b..675c1c31a 100644
--- a/ovsdb/execution.c
+++ b/ovsdb/execution.c
@@ -719,7 +719,7 @@ ovsdb_execute_assert(struct ovsdb_execution *x, struct ovsdb_parser *parser,
 {
     const struct json *lock_name;
 
-    lock_name = ovsdb_parser_member(parser, "lock", OP_STRING);
+    lock_name = ovsdb_parser_member(parser, "lock", OP_ID);
     if (!lock_name) {
         return NULL;
     }