> -----Original Message----- > From: Nagendra Kumar [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: den 4 september 2014 10:24 > 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] > > > 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? [Hans] Returning prematurely from SHUTDOWN before LOCKED state has been reached is an error to me. AMF can internally wait until the LOCK operation is done and then respond to both SHUTDOWN and LOCK.
> > 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
