Hi Alex, If you have ready to use test application can you please attach.
-AVM On 10/1/2015 10:34 PM, Alex Jones wrote: > Summary: CKPT: fix crash in cpnd when opening replica times out [#1510] > Review request for Trac Ticket(s): 1510 > Peer Reviewer(s): AVM > Pull request to: AVM > Affected branch(es): default, 4.7, 4.6, 4.5 > 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 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 923566e6c96312c15330b4e8ed0c81a80a2701f0 > Author: Alex Jones <[email protected]> > Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2015 12:56:53 -0400 > > ckptnd: fix crash when checkpoint open sync to active times out [#1510] > > ckptnd core dumps with many different stack traces > > When a collocated checkpoint replica is opened, and the active replica > has > large numbers of sections (~200k), the sync from the active to the > replica > can timeout. If the MDS sync succeeds, but the error code in the > out_evt is > not SA_AIS_OK, the current code jumps to the ckpt_shm_node_free_error > label. > The code under this label assumes that the node was not successfully > created > in the database, so doesn't remove it. But in this case it was created. > The > node memory is freed, but the node is not removed from the database. The > next time this checkpoint is accessed, cpnd will access freed memory and > crash. > > Set a flag after the node has been added to the database. And in the > ckpt_node_free_error label, remove the node from the database if it was > added. > > > Complete diffstat: > ------------------ > osaf/services/saf/cpsv/cpnd/cpnd_evt.c | 10 ++++++++++ > 1 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > > > Testing Commands: > ----------------- > 1) create a collocated checkpoint with 200k sections, and continue updating > the > sections > 2) open the same checkpoint on another node (this creates a replica) > > > Testing, Expected Results: > -------------------------- > 1) cpnd on the replica node should not crash, and sync should succeed > > > 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. > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Opensaf-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel
