Summary:cpsv: avoid stale ckpt IMM objects creation if Ckpt Open returns err 18
[#559]
Review request for Trac Ticket(s): #559
Peer Reviewer(s): Ramesh
Pull request to: Mahesh
Affected branch(es): opensaf-4.2.x opensaf-4.3.x & defualt
Development branch: defualt
--------------------------------
Impacted area Impact y/n
--------------------------------
Docs n
Build system n
RPM/packaging n
Configuration files n
Startup scripts n
SAF services n
OpenSAF services y
Core libraries n
Samples n
Tests n
Other n
Comments (indicate scope for each "y" above):
---------------------------------------------
The stale ckpt IMM objects are getting created even
after exceeding the CPND_MAX_REPLICAS limit ( 1000 ) . In other words stale
IMM objects is getting created even the saCkptCheckpointOpen() returned 18
(SA_AIS_ERR_NO_RESOURCES ), now this is avoided .
changeset 596d4d7bfdffbeef69af7d5e38f8f55a71c4fe63
Author: A V Mahesh <mahesh.va...@oracle.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2013 14:03:50 +0530
cpsv: avoid stale ckpt IMM objects creation if Ckpt Open returns err 18
[#559]
Complete diffstat:
------------------
osaf/services/saf/cpsv/cpnd/cpnd_evt.c | 7 +++++++
osaf/services/saf/cpsv/cpnd/cpnd_proc.c | 3 ++-
2 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
Testing Commands:
-----------------
steps to reproduce the problem :
1) Bring up two controller nodes
2) compile & run the upperlimit_cpsv_test.c application on SC-1,
till the cpnd exceed the maximum number of allowed replicas
(CPND_MAX_REPLICAS)
3) comile & run ( upperlimit_cpsv_test.c file attached to ticket #559)
#./checkpoint
Attempt 16-30: saCkptCheckpointOpen returned 1 (SA_AIS_OK ).
Attempt 28-14: saCkptCheckpointOpen returned 1 (SA_AIS_OK ).
Attempt 32-10: saCkptCheckpointOpen returned 18 (SA_AIS_ERR_NO_RESOURCES).
Attempt 32-10: saCkptCheckpointOpen returned 18 (SA_AIS_ERR_NO_RESOURCES).
4 ) will find some stale ckpt IMM objects
# immfind | grep -i ckpt
Testing, Expected Results:
--------------------------
No stale ckpt IMM objects should be observed.
Conditions of Submission:
-------------------------
Ack
Arch Built Started Linux distro
-------------------------------------------
mips n n
mips64 n n
x86 n n
x86_64 y y
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.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rapidly troubleshoot problems before they affect your business. Most IT
organizations don't have a clear picture of how application performance
affects their revenue. With AppDynamics, you get 100% visibility into your
Java,.NET, & PHP application. Start your 15-day FREE TRIAL of AppDynamics Pro!
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=84349831&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Opensaf-devel mailing list
Opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel
