Summary: amfd: return TRY_AGAIN for su/node lockin op if su pres state is not 
appropriate [#807]
Review request for Trac Ticket(s): #807
Peer Reviewer(s): Hans F, Hans N, Praveen 
Pull request to: <<LIST THE PERSON WITH PUSH ACCESS HERE>>
Affected branch(es): All
Development branch: opensaf-4.3.x

--------------------------------
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):
---------------------------------------------
 <<EXPLAIN/COMMENT THE PATCH SERIES HERE>>

changeset 5f1625b775a92ed80bd6e5c9aff44bcf893dd97d
Author: Nagendra Kumar<[email protected]>
Date:   Wed, 02 Apr 2014 18:34:34 +0530

        amfd: return TRY_AGAIN for su/node lockin op if su pres state is not
        appropriate [#807]

        Problem: When su is either in instantiating/Terminating/restarting 
state and
        if either su/node lock-in operation is performed, then it interrupt SU
        states and forces component to try again. Ideally this condition 
shouldn;t
        arise.

        Analysis: WHen su is not in appropriate state, allowing lock-in admin
        operation is making su states and CLC weird.

        Fix: Now, Amfd is returning try again for su/node lock-in admin command 
if
        su is in insting/terminating/restarting state. Once, SU reaches to
        insted/term failed/inst failed/uninstantiated, this command can be 
accepted.


Complete diffstat:
------------------
 osaf/services/saf/avsv/avd/avd_node.c |  9 +++++++++
 osaf/services/saf/avsv/avd/avd_su.c   |  8 ++++++++
 2 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)


Testing Commands:
-----------------
1. Make su restarting state by creating fault, and keep 
sleep 5 sec in instantiation script, and then issue below command :
a. amf-adm lock-in  safSu=SU1,safSg=SG1,safApp=AmfDemo;
b. amf-adm lock-in  safAmfNode=SC-1,safAmfCluster=myAmfCluster;
2. Make su instantiang state by creating fault, and keep 
sleep 5 sec in instantiation script, and then issue below command :
a. amf-adm lock-in  safSu=SU1,safSg=SG1,safApp=AmfDemo;
b. amf-adm lock-in  safAmfNode=SC-1,safAmfCluster=myAmfCluster;
3. Make su terminating state by creating fault, and keep 
sleep 5 sec in instantiation script, and then issue below command :
a. amf-adm lock-in  safSu=SU1,safSg=SG1,safApp=AmfDemo;
b. amf-adm lock-in  safAmfNode=SC-1,safAmfCluster=myAmfCluster;


Testing, Expected Results:
--------------------------
In all test cases above, TRY_AGAIN will be returned.

Conditions of Submission:
-------------------------
Ack from peer maintainers

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.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Opensaf-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel

Reply via email to