Source Code Review Form ======================= (version 1.3) Date: 2007-12-17 1 Identification JG-2007-12-17-0: Enhancem.: higher precision for cpu, ru_utime, ru_stime Bugster: 6288965 Issue: 869 Review: HP 2 Conforms to specification 2 [x] yes 2 [ ] no - comment: 3 Documentation 3.1 user/admin guide OK, or doc CR filed? 3.1 [x] yes 3.1 [ ] no - comment: 3.2 man pages (user view) correct? 3.2 [x] yes 3.2 [ ] no - comment: 3.3 -help output correct and complete? 3.3 [x] yes 3.3 [ ] no - comment: 3.4 documented interfaces (at least GDI, EVI, libs, ADOC format) correct, updated? 3.4 [x] yes 3.4 [ ] no - comment: 3.5 messages, output formats and defines OK? 3.5 [x] yes 3.5 [ ] no - comment: 3.6 Bugster CR complete and correct? 3.6 [x] yes 3.6 [ ] no - comment: 3.7 Issuezilla entry (if exists) complete and correct? 3.7 [x] yes 3.7 [ ] no - comment: 4 Source review 4.1 Style guide conformance 4.1 [x] yes 4.1 [ ] no - comment: 4.2 Memory leaks 4.2 [x] yes 4.2 [ ] no - comment: 4.3 Thread safe 4.3 [x] yes 4.3 [ ] no - comment: 5 Tests 5.1 Used memory leak debugger 5.1 [ ] yes 5.1 [x] no - comment: n/a 5.2 Manual tests Description: Installed the cluster (by testsuite), including ARCo. Enable reporting. Submitted test jobs. Verify with qacct, - that ru_utime, ru_stime, and cpu are output - small values of ru_utime and ru_time are also reported (from a short sleeper job) Query ARCo database, table sge_job_usage, verify that the correct ru_utime, ru_stime, and cpu are reported Test successfull: 5.2 [x] yes 5.2 [ ] no - comment: 5.3 Testsuite covers issue 5.3 [x] yes, all tests doing accounting (e.g. functional/usage, arco tests, ...) 5.3 [ ] no - comment: 5.4 If 5.3 = no: New testsuite test or module test created? 5.4 [ ] yes, path: 5.4 [ ] no - justification: 5.5 If 5.4 = no: Testsuite issue created? 5.5 [ ] yes, id: 5.5 [ ] no - justification: 5.6 Testsuite run successfull 5.6 [x] yes 5.6 [ ] no - comment: 6 Comments 7 Accepted 7 [x] yes 7 [ ] no - comment: