Summary:imm:Return TRY_AGAIN if implemeter is not yet discarded [#946] 
Review request for Trac Ticket(s):946 
Peer Reviewer(s):AndersBj, Zoran 
Affected branch(es):4.3.x, 4.4, 4.5, default 
Development branch:default 

--------------------------------
Impacted area       Impact y/n
--------------------------------
 Docs                    n
 Build system            n
 RPM/packaging           n
 Configuration files     n
 Startup scripts         n
 SAF services            n
 OpenSAF services        n
 Core libraries          n
 Samples                 n
 Tests                   n
 Other                   n


Comments (indicate scope for each "y" above):
---------------------------------------------

changeset a1efd700ef8e0c24fdc003506fc0a850892d2c99
Author: Neelakanta Reddy<[email protected]>
Date:   Thu, 04 Sep 2014 16:25:36 +0530

        imm:Return TRY_AGAIN if implemeter is not yet discarded [#946] At the 
time
        of OIfinalizing of the OI handle, An FEVS message is sent to clear the
        implementer. A FEVs message is sent from local IMMND to active IMMD and
        active IMMD broadcast the message to all IMMND. Before the broadcast 
FEVS
        message arrived from IMMD, the AMFD tries to set the implementer again 
with
        the same name and ERR_EXISTS is returned.

        if the implementer is not yet discarded and marked as not-dying (this is
        because the implementer set is arrived before clearing it in IMMNDs,) 
then
        TRY_AGAIN will be returned.


Complete diffstat:
------------------
 osaf/services/saf/immsv/immnd/ImmModel.cc |  1 +
 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)


Testing Commands:
-----------------
As explauned in description of ticket

Testing, Expected Results:
--------------------------
TRY_AGAIN must be returned when implementer is not yet discarded 
but implementerset is arrived for same implementer name.

Conditions of Submission:
-------------------------
Ack from AndersBj


Arch      Built     Started    Linux distro
-------------------------------------------
mips        n          n
mips64      n          n
x86         n          n
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.


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