Summary: amfd: fix deletion of runtime objects of class SaAmfSIAssignment [#1540] Review request for Trac Ticket(s): <<IF ANY LIST THE #>> Peer Reviewer(s): Hans N., Nagendra, Gary, Srikanth R. Pull request to: <<LIST THE PERSON WITH PUSH ACCESS HERE>> Affected branch(es): ALL 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): --------------------------------------------- changeset 010b8796e8972b38a3b2e5b1e38717c5e8febe9a Author: [email protected] Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2015 17:24:05 +0530 amfd: fix deletion of runtime objects of class SaAmfSIAssignment [#1540] In the reported problem, application SI was lock and then unlocked. When SI got successfully assigned, controller failover was done. Upon successful fail-over, command : amf-state siass all | grep SI2 does not show any SUSI for this SI. SUSI for the SI exists in AMFD data base, this can be verified by doing si- swap operation on the SI or by dumping amfd state. When SI was locked, a job is added in IMM job queue for the deletion of SUSI at active when it creates it in AMFD and at standby AMFD it is added when it gets the checkpointing request from active. But when SI was unlocked, only active added a job for susi creation, but in its checkpointing standby AMFD was unable to add. The reason was in function check_to_create_immjob_at_standby_amfd(), check was added for internal classIds of classes SaAmfSIAssignment amd SaAmfCSIAssignment which is valid for deletion and update. But for creation of SUSI and CSICOMP in IMM name of parent i.e SI and CSI is required. Because of this after failover when new active clears its IMM job list, it only deletes the SUSI but since no create job was added, user does not see SUSI and CSICOMP for SI and CSI, respectively. Patch resolves the problem by adding the check on SI and CSI class id also. Complete diffstat: ------------------ osaf/services/saf/amf/amfd/csi.cc | 3 --- osaf/services/saf/amf/amfd/imm.cc | 15 +++++++++++++-- osaf/services/saf/amf/amfd/siass.cc | 4 +++- 3 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) Testing Commands: ----------------- steps to test: 1)Bring 2N application havinig 4 SIs and two SUs hosted on standby controller. 2)Lock and unlock any SI. 3) Bring down active controller. Testing, Expected Results: -------------------------- When standby controller becomes active, user will be able to see all the SUSIs of application and middleware using command: amf-state siass all Conditions of Submission: ------------------------- Ack from any reviewer before Rc1 tag of 4.7. 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
