Re: base-3.16.1 bug

[Ralph Lange <ralph.lange@gmx.de>]

Hi Andrew,

I'm running into this right now, because it is failing my tests (that try to write to a bo record).

Why is none of our tests catching this? (dbPutLinkTest is named like it should.)

I would say the dummy method returning OK is the way to go. Other link types might return errors that are worth reporting, and it is certainly a property of the CONSTANT link that a put() operation is never producing an error.

Cheers,
~Ralph

On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 11:35 PM, Andrew Johnson <anj@aps.anl.gov> wrote:

[...]
The problem is related to the new Link Support code: The OUT links in
both ao records are unset so are CONSTANT links, and the ao Soft Device
support returns the status value it gets from calling dbPutLink() as the
result of its write_ao() method, but for the CONSTANT link type there is
no lset::putValue() method, so the return value from dbPutLink() is
S_db_noLSET, which now gets returned all the way back through the
rset::process() method up to the routine dbChannel_put() so RSRV sees an
error from the put which it passes back to the CA client.

The same problem will probably occur with bo, stringout and lso records
because the soft device support for those record types also pass the
return value from dbPutLink() back to the record type. Other device
supports always return 0 independent of what dbPutLink() returns so
won't generate the error.

Ralph, Michael:

Where do you think is the correct place to squash this error? Should I
add a dummy lset::putValue() method to the dbConstLink type (that just
returns OK), or change the soft device supports to discard the return
value from dbPutLink()?

- Andrew

--
Arguing for surveillance because you have nothing to hide is no
different than making the claim, "I don't care about freedom of
speech because I have nothing to say." -- Edward Snowdon