Summary: cpsv: improve handling unlink and close non-collocated checkpoint 
[#1616]
Review request for Trac Ticket(s): #1616
Peer Reviewer(s): [email protected]; [email protected]
Pull request to: [email protected]
Affected branch(es): 4.6, 4.7, default
Development branch: default

--------------------------------
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 bedbaf70f420bc367a83d7d7fabaee284cdea38a
Author: Nhat Pham <[email protected]>
Date:   Wed, 09 Dec 2015 09:14:59 +0700

        cpsv: improve handling unlink and close non-collocated checkpoint 
[#1616]

        Problem:
        -------- There are several problems relating to closing and unlinking 
non-
        collocated checkpoint.

        1. A non-collocated checkpoint is firstly created on SC-2. It is closed 
on
        SC-2. It is opened on PL-3. It is unlinked. It is closes on PL-3. The
        replicas on SCs are not destroyed although the checkpoint is unlinked 
and no
        client is using it.

        2. A non-collocated checkpoint is firstly created on PL-3. It is closed 
on
        PL-3. It is opened on SC-2. It is unlinked. It is closes on SC-2. The
        replicas on SCs and PL-3 are not destroyed although the checkpoint is
        unlinked and no client is using it.

        3. A non-collocated checkpoint is firstly created on PL-3. It is closed 
on
        PL-3. It is opened on PL-4. It is unlinked. The replicas on SCs and 
PL-3 are
        destroyed although the checkpoint is using on PL-4.

        Solution:
        --------- The main cause of above problems is to use checking if non-
        collocated replica is on PL to decide destroying the replicas. This
        mechanism is not correct in some cases. The solution is use another
        mechanism which checks if there is any client using the checkpoint on 
the
        cluster by verifying if the retention duration timer is active or not.

        Test:
        ----- Following test cases were executed for both non-collocated and
        collocated checkpoint to verify the solution: 1.
        verify_unlink_ckpt_created_on_sc_before_close_it_from_sc 2.
        verify_unlink_ckpt_created_on_sc_before_close_it_from_pl 3.
        verify_unlink_ckpt_created_on_sc_after_close_it 4.
        verify_unlink_ckpt_created_on_pl_before_close_it_from_pl 5.
        verify_unlink_ckpt_created_on_pl_before_close_it_from_sc 6.
        verify_unlink_ckpt_created_on_pl_before_close_it_from_other_pl 7.
        verify_unlink_ckpt_created_on_pl_after_close_it


Complete diffstat:
------------------
 osaf/services/saf/cpsv/cpnd/cpnd_evt.c  |  51 
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------------
 osaf/services/saf/cpsv/cpnd/cpnd_proc.c |  66 
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------------------------
 2 files changed, 64 insertions(+), 53 deletions(-)


Testing Commands:
-----------------
Follow test steps described in the ticket #1616


Testing, Expected Results:
--------------------------
-


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.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Opensaf-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel

Reply via email to