[openib-general] win related [was: Re: [PATCH 1/2] opensm: sigusr1: syslog() fixes]

[Yevgeny Kliteynik]

Hi Hal.

Hal Rosenstock wrote:
> Hi Yevgeny,
> 
> On Wed, 2007-01-10 at 02:47, Yevgeny Kliteynik wrote:
>> Hi Sasha,
>>
>> Sasha Khapyorsky wrote:
>>> Hi Yevgeny,
>>>
>>> On 12:05 Tue 09 Jan     , Yevgeny Kliteynik wrote:
>>>> Hi Sasha.
>>>> Thanks for spotting this issue - I missed it when I reviewed the patch.
>>>> Here's how things look in windows:
>>>>  * openlog() and closelog() are redefined to nothing in windows config header
>>>>  * cl_log_event() implementation on windows does all the work - gets handler
>>>>    to event log, logs the message, and closes the handler.
>>>>    It does *not* uses syslog().
>>>>
>>>> To use syslog/sysopen/sysclose on windows, a user have to install some 
>>>> package (e.g. "Interix") that provides various daemons (such as syslogd), 
>>>> similar to Linux/Unix:
>>>> 	http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms811897.aspx#ucmgch10_topic12
>>>> 	http://www.interix.com/
>>> And this is not done for WinOpenSM now. Is this would be useful option? I
>>> guess this could solve a lot of compatibility problems and simplify the
>>> porting dramatically, right?
>> I'll address this question to the windows guys. But I seriously doubt that
>> they would want to make OSM depend on some third-party product, whether it
>> is commercial or free.
>>  
>>>> So replacing cl_log_event() with syslog() would definitely cause a problem.
>>>>
>>>> A (pretty ugly) solution can be writing a wrapper function to cl_log_event() 
>>>> on windows and redefining syslog() to use this wrapper.
>>> Like #define syslog() cl_log_event() ? Not so ugly (better than
>>> combination of openlog()/closelog() and "unrelated" cl_log_event()),
>>> and perfectly simple IMO.
>> "#define syslog() cl_log_event()" will not do the job, since these functions 
>> have different definitios:
>> 	syslog(int priority, char *message, ...);
>> 	cl_log_event(char*, cl_log_type_t, char*, void*, uint32_t);
>> so there should be wrapper just for windows that will prepare the message
>> for cl_log_event() as a single string.
> 
> So just so I am clear on this:
> 
> Is the wrapper approach acceptable to you ?

Yes, I think I can live with that :)

-- Yevgeny

 
> -- Hal
>  
>>>> But the question is: why do we need this replacement in the first place?
>>> Look at the original Ira's patch for details - there syslog() is
>>> introduced and closelog() is removed from cl_event_log(). I think his
>>> motivation is to keep syslog connected for log reopening events and
>>> prevent noisy openlog()/closelog() calls in cl_log_event().
>> Agree.
>>
>> --Yevgeny
>>  
>>>>> replacement itself is needed in order to restore complib's cl_log_event()
>>>>> behavior used by various applications (like ibutils ones and others).
>>>> What behavior are we talking about here?
>>> OTOH closelog() is needed than openlog()/syslog()/closelog() is part
>>> shared library (look "Submitting Syslog Messages" at 'info libc' ).
>>>
>>> Sasha
>>>
>