> So far as I have seen SMF never works on SI level.
We did the same thing with SU as part of ticket #582.

> I vote for BAD_OPERATION.
As per Specs, this error is reported when target entity is locked already. Here 
it is not locked.

But bigger question is : If Specs defines this path/flow as valid and provides 
sanctity and doesn't consider it as an error. Why Amf should return an error?

Thanks
-Nagu

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Hans Feldt [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: 04 September 2014 12:53
> To: Nagendra Kumar; Hans Nordebäck; Praveen Malviya
> Cc: [email protected]
> Subject: RE: [devel] [PATCH 1 of 1] amfd: respond to shutdown op if lock has
> been issued before it completes [#1021]
> 
> So far as I have seen SMF never works on SI level. The problem here is also 
> more
> manually triggered, some operator gets tired of waiting for SHUTDOWN and
> goes for LOCK. SMF would not do that.
> I vote for BAD_OPERATION.
> /Hans
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Nagendra Kumar [mailto:[email protected]]
> > Sent: den 4 september 2014 08:44
> > To: Hans Feldt; Hans Nordebäck; Praveen Malviya
> > Cc: [email protected]
> > Subject: RE: [devel] [PATCH 1 of 1] amfd: respond to shutdown op if
> > lock has been issued before it completes [#1021]
> >
> > Hi Hans,
> > I think it is better to return OK because of following reasons:
> > 1. It avoids Smf upgrade failures. If Amf returns TIME_OUT, Smf tries
> > again(not sure about the implementation, but as per Spec, it should try 
> > again)
> and Smf may get TRY_AGAIN or BAD_OP error return code. If Smf get BAD_OP,
> it will abort upgrade.
> > 2. If Smf accepts OK in this case and then run another command like
> > unlock, then worst case, it will get TRY_AGAIN and this is one of above 
> > case.
> >
> > Thanks
> > -Nagu
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Hans Feldt [mailto:[email protected]]
> > > Sent: 03 September 2014 17:54
> > > To: Hans Feldt; Nagendra Kumar; Hans Nordebäck; Praveen Malviya
> > > Cc: [email protected]
> > > Subject: RE: [devel] [PATCH 1 of 1] amfd: respond to shutdown op if
> > > lock has been issued before it completes [#1021]
> > >
> > > Or from 9.4.6:
> > >
> > > SA_AIS_ERR_BAD_OPERATION - The operation was not successful because
> > > the target entity is locked or locked for instantiation.
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Hans Feldt [mailto:[email protected]]
> > > > Sent: den 3 september 2014 14:15
> > > > To: [email protected]; Hans Nordebäck;
> > > > [email protected]
> > > > Cc: [email protected]
> > > > Subject: Re: [devel] [PATCH 1 of 1] amfd: respond to shutdown op
> > > > if lock has been issued before it completes [#1021]
> > > >
> > > > Do we think OK is an appropriate error code here?
> > > > Maybe TIMEOUT?
> > > > /Hans
> > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]
> > > > > Sent: den 3 september 2014 13:45
> > > > > To: Hans Feldt; Hans Nordebäck; [email protected]
> > > > > Cc: [email protected]
> > > > > Subject: [PATCH 1 of 1] amfd: respond to shutdown op if lock has
> > > > > been issued before it completes [#1021]
> > > > >
> > > > >  osaf/services/saf/amf/amfd/si.cc |  4 ++++
> > > > >  1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > If shutdown op is undergoing, lock can be issued.
> > > > > If lock is isued, Amf is not responding to shutdown op.
> > > > > Amf should ideally respond to shutdown op immediately after it
> > > > > receives lock op. And after lock op completes, then Amf should
> > > > > respond to lock op.
> > > > >
> > > > > diff --git a/osaf/services/saf/amf/amfd/si.cc
> > > > > b/osaf/services/saf/amf/amfd/si.cc
> > > > > --- a/osaf/services/saf/amf/amfd/si.cc
> > > > > +++ b/osaf/services/saf/amf/amfd/si.cc
> > > > > @@ -881,6 +881,10 @@ static void si_admin_op_cb(SaImmOiHandle
> > > > >                               report_admin_op_error(immOiHandle,
> > > invocation, SA_AIS_ERR_TRY_AGAIN, NULL,
> > > > >                                               "'%s' other 
> > > > > semantics...",
> > > objectName->value);
> > > > >                               goto done;
> > > > > +                     } else {
> > > > > +                             rc = SA_AIS_OK;
> > > > > +
> > >   avd_saImmOiAdminOperationResult(immOiHandle, si->invocation, rc);
> > > > > +                             si->invocation = 0;
> > > > >                       }
> > > > >               }
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > ----
> > > > --------
> > > > 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

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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

Reply via email to