Summary: lcknd: fix deadlock when master nd is rebooted
Review request for Trac Ticket(s): 1488
Peer Reviewer(s): Mathi, Ramesh
Pull request to: Mathi
Affected branch(es): default, 4.6, 4.5
Development branch:

--------------------------------
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 799bdb0e951ab07e9bc9f21ba20ffeaacb5c199c
Author: Alex Jones <[email protected]>
Date:   Thu, 17 Sep 2015 12:31:00 -0400

        lcknd: fix lock sync bug during election of new master [#1488]

        Exclusive locks which are held when the master nd reboots can never be
        unlocked, and pending exclusive locks which are held when the master nd
        reboots can never be given out.

        When the master nd reboots and a new master nd is elected, the other nds
        which have locks in use resend the lock information to the new master. 
But,
        not all information needed by the new master is sent. "lcl_resource_id" 
and
        "lcl_lockid" are not sent. So, when the new master sends an unlock 
response
        to an nd which was in the middle of unlocking with the old master, the 
nd is
        unable to find the local lock because the master didn't send all the 
right
        data. Same when the new master send a lock response to an nd with a 
pending
        lock.

        The solution is in two parts. (1) lcl_lockid was not being put into the
        GLSV_LOCK_REQ_INFO message by MDS, even though it was part of the 
message
        structure. This is now done. And (2) add lcl_resource_id to the
        GLSV_EVT_GLND_RSC_INFO message so that the new master nd can properly 
set up
        the lock queues.


Complete diffstat:
------------------
 osaf/libs/common/glsv/glsv_edu.c         |   2 ++
 osaf/libs/common/glsv/include/glnd_evt.h |   1 +
 osaf/libs/common/glsv/include/glnd_res.h |   7 ++++---
 osaf/services/saf/glsv/glnd/glnd_cb.c    |  12 ++++++------
 osaf/services/saf/glsv/glnd/glnd_evt.c   |   4 +++-
 osaf/services/saf/glsv/glnd/glnd_res.c   |  34 
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 6 files changed, 49 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)


Testing Commands:
-----------------
1) Create a program which holds an exclusive lock for a few seconds, and then
   releases it, in a loop, using saLckResourceLock and saLckResourceUnlock.
2) Run this program on at least 6 nodes.
3) After running for a few minutes, reboot the node with the master lcknd for 
this
   lock.


Testing, Expected Results:
--------------------------
1) The program running on all other nodes should successfully continue with 
locking
   and unlocking. The calls to saLckResourceLock and saLckResourceUnlock should
   work successfully and correctly.


Conditions of Submission:
-------------------------
 <<HOW MANY DAYS BEFORE PUSHING, CONSENSUS ETC>>


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.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Monitor Your Dynamic Infrastructure at Any Scale With Datadog!
Get real-time metrics from all of your servers, apps and tools
in one place.
SourceForge users - Click here to start your Free Trial of Datadog now!
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=241902991&iu=/4140
_______________________________________________
Opensaf-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel

Reply via email to