Ack -Nagu
-----Original Message----- From: Praveen Malviya Sent: 05 November 2013 14:54 To: [email protected]; Nagendra Kumar Cc: [email protected] Subject: [PATCH 0 of 1] Review Request for amfd : honor SI dependency within SU in sufailover recovery [#503] Summary: amfd : honor SI dependency within SU in sufailover recovery [#503] Review request for Trac Ticket(s):AMF #503 Peer Reviewer(s):Hans F., Nagendra Pull request to: <<LIST THE PERSON WITH PUSH ACCESS HERE>> Affected branch(es): All Development branch: <<IF ANY GIVE THE REPO URL>> -------------------------------- Impacted area Impact y/n -------------------------------- Docs n Build system n RPM/packaging n Configuration files n Startup scripts n SAF services y OpenSAF services n Core libraries n Samples n Tests n Other n Comments (indicate scope for each "y" above): --------------------------------------------- Please see the commit log below and ticket description. changeset 5419198580a0bf5945676a9c6eff1f856688c31b Author: [email protected] Date: Tue, 05 Nov 2013 14:49:30 +0530 amfd : honor SI dependency within SU in sufailover recovery [#503] AMF honor SI dependecy within SU while performing failover of SU. In some cases like this issue, it has been observed that failover depends on the order of SIs in the SU list. Due to this, sometimes, AMF performs failover of dep SI before the sponsor SI. This patch ensures when SI dependency is configured within SU, AMF always honors SI dependency. Complete diffstat: ------------------ osaf/services/saf/amf/amfd/si_dep.cc | 13 +++++++++++++ 1 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) Testing Commands: ----------------- Based on description of ticket. Tested with configurations attached in the ticket. Testing, Expected Results: -------------------------- sufailover recovery was done by honoring SI dependency. Conditions of Submission: ------------------------- Ack from Hans or Nagendra. Arch Built Started Linux distro ------------------------------------------- mips n n mips64 n n x86 y y x86_64 n n powerpc n n powerpc64 n n Reviewer Checklist: ------------------- [Submitters: make sure that your review doesn't trigger any checkmarks!] Your checkin has not passed review because (see checked entries): ___ Your RR template is generally incomplete; it has too many blank entries that need proper data filled in. ___ You have failed to nominate the proper persons for review and push. ___ Your patches do not have proper short+long header ___ You have grammar/spelling in your header that is unacceptable. ___ You have exceeded a sensible line length in your headers/comments/text. ___ You have failed to put in a proper Trac Ticket # into your commits. ___ You have incorrectly put/left internal data in your comments/files (i.e. internal bug tracking tool IDs, product names etc) ___ You have not given any evidence of testing beyond basic build tests. Demonstrate some level of runtime or other sanity testing. ___ You have ^M present in some of your files. These have to be removed. ___ You have needlessly changed whitespace or added whitespace crimes like trailing spaces, or spaces before tabs. ___ You have mixed real technical changes with whitespace and other cosmetic code cleanup changes. These have to be separate commits. ___ You need to refactor your submission into logical chunks; there is too much content into a single commit. ___ You have extraneous garbage in your review (merge commits etc) ___ You have giant attachments which should never have been sent; Instead you should place your content in a public tree to be pulled. ___ You have too many commits attached to an e-mail; resend as threaded commits, or place in a public tree for a pull. ___ You have resent this content multiple times without a clear indication of what has changed between each re-send. ___ You have failed to adequately and individually address all of the comments and change requests that were proposed in the initial review. ___ You have a misconfigured ~/.hgrc file (i.e. username, email etc) ___ Your computer have a badly configured date and time; confusing the the threaded patch review. ___ Your changes affect IPC mechanism, and you don't present any results for in-service upgradability test. ___ Your changes affect user manual and documentation, your patch series do not contain the patch that updates the Doxygen manual. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Sponsored by Intel(R) XDK Develop, test and display web and hybrid apps with a single code base. Download it for free now! http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=111408631&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk _______________________________________________ Opensaf-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel
