Summary: amfnd : do not send susi success response during su-failover [#1015] Review request for Trac Ticket(s): #1015 Peer Reviewer(s): AMF contributors Pull request to: <<LIST THE PERSON WITH PUSH ACCESS HERE>> Affected branch(es): default, 4.5 and 4.4 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 n OpenSAF services y Core libraries n Samples n Tests n Other n Comments (indicate scope for each "y" above): --------------------------------------------- changeset 420c995c616599354e92407536530a709d652bef Author: [email protected] Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2014 17:03:56 +0530 amfnd : do not send susi success response during su-failover [#1015] SIs are not assigned to SUs when component's rejection of active assignment leads to su-failover during si-swap (SI dependency is enabled). When si-swap is in progress it gives active assignment to the standby SU for dependents after active becomes quiesced.One of the components rejects active assignment and AMFND executes su-failover recovery. During su- failover recovery, AMFND is reporting success for active assignments on the faulty component when it gets cleaned up successfully. In su-failover all assignments will be failovered without quiesced and removed state by AMFD when it gets su-failover request from AMFND. Since AMFND reports susi sucess, AMFD gives standby assignments to SU1. Instead AMFND should directly send su-failover request to AMFD and AMFD will give active assignment back to quiesced SU1. Patch ensures that AMFND will not send SUSI success to AMFD when components fault with su-failover recovery during assignments. Complete diffstat: ------------------ osaf/services/saf/amf/amfnd/clc.cc | 9 +++++---- 1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) Testing Commands: ----------------- Tested following tickets as per their description: #1015, #1016, #1017, #1018, #1020 and #1023. Testing, Expected Results: -------------------------- PASS, all cases works fine. Conditions of Submission: ------------------------- Ack from any reviewer. 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. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Slashdot TV. Video for Nerds. Stuff that matters. http://tv.slashdot.org/ _______________________________________________ Opensaf-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel
