Summary: PLM: handle ATCA M7 state (communication lost) better Review request for Trac Ticket(s): 1601 Peer Reviewer(s): Mathi Pull request to: Mathi Affected branch(es): default, 4.7, 4.6 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): --------------------------------------------- changeset ce496623c77fdd7c020049940533d07712eed99a Author: Alex Jones <[email protected]> Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2015 10:24:17 -0500 plm: handle ATCA M7 state (communication lost) better [#1601] If blade is removed from the chassis very quickly such that no hot swap event is sent by HPI (shelf manager puts the state to M7), PLM never sets "management lost" readiness state. According to HPI-B.03.02-XTCA, RESOURCE event is used for transitions to and from M7. PLM does not currently handle a RESOURCE_FAILURE event, and so it doesn't set "management lost" readiness state in the above case. Solution is to pass up the RESOURCE event, so that the HE state machine can set "management lost" readiness state. Complete diffstat: ------------------ osaf/libs/common/plmsv/include/plms.h | 2 +- osaf/services/saf/plmsv/plms/hpi_intf/plms_hsm.c | 115 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------- osaf/services/saf/plmsv/plms/plms_he_pres_fsm.c | 102 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-- osaf/services/saf/plmsv/plms/plms_proc.c | 2 +- 4 files changed, 205 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-) Testing Commands: ----------------- 1) Pull out ATCA blade very quickly (surprise extraction) such that no hot swap event is sent by HPI 2) Look at readiness state and presence state for the HE Testing, Expected Results: -------------------------- 1) Readiness state for HE should have "management lost" bit set 2) Presence state should still be active Conditions of Submission: ------------------------- 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. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Go from Idea to Many App Stores Faster with Intel(R) XDK Give your users amazing mobile app experiences with Intel(R) XDK. Use one codebase in this all-in-one HTML5 development environment. Design, debug & build mobile apps & 2D/3D high-impact games for multiple OSs. http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=254741551&iu=/4140 _______________________________________________ Opensaf-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel
