the changes look good to me.

BTW, one minor thing I noticed - there's no
way in nwamadm I could see to request
disable/enable of NCUs in the inactive NCP.
Feels like a low-priority RFE to me, what
do you think? Thanks!

Alan

Anurag S. Maskey wrote:
> Alan's changes do make the fix for 10503 simpler.  Also, the ncu 
> DESTROY action to nwamd wasn't passing the parent NCP name which I've 
> fixed and thus being ignored.
>
> Below is the updated webrev for both bug fixes.
>
> http://zhadum.east/export/ws/am223141/temp/nwam1-work/webrev/
>
> Anurag
>
>
> Alan Maguire wrote:
>> hi Anurag
>>
>> I'll take a look at the changes in the morning,
>> but I just wanted to note there's probably some
>> merging required with my recent push.
>>
>> It simplifies some of the libnwam_ncp.c stuff,
>> so I think all you'll need to do to get ncu
>> removal working is remove the following few
>> lines in libnwam_ncp.c:
>>
>>       /* Check if parent NCP is active if not called by user netadm */
>>        if (!nwam_uid_is_netadm() && nwam_ncu_is_active(ncuh))
>>                return (NWAM_ENTITY_IN_USE);
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> Alan
>>
>> Anurag S. Maskey wrote:
>>> Regarding destroying NCUs of the active NCP:
>>>
>>> I found that there are no adverse effects.  The NCUs are destroyed 
>>> from nwamd's representation also.  If the NCU is in offline* state, 
>>> then it is also unplumbed.  I've updated the bug at
>>>
>>>    http://defect.opensolaris.org/bz/show_bug.cgi?id=10503
>>>
>>> Webrev is at
>>>
>>>    http://zhadum.east/export/ws/am223141/temp/nwam1-work/webrev/
>>>
>>>
>>> Also, includes fix for bug 10510 door_if.c:484-485 contradicts debug 
>>> message in 480-481.
>>>
>>>    http://defect.opensolaris.org/bz/show_bug.cgi?id=10510
>>>
>>>
>>> Anurag
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> nwam-dev mailing list
>>> nwam-dev at opensolaris.org
>>> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/nwam-dev
>>


Reply via email to