Hi Anders Widell,
Thanks for the detailed explanation  about CLM during headless state.

HI  Nhat Pham ,

Comment : 3
Please see below  the problem I was interpreted now I  seeing it during 
CLMD obscene ( during headless state ),
so now CPND/CLMA need to  to address below case , currently cpnd clm 
init failed with return value:   SA_AIS_ERR_UNAVAILABLE
but should be SA_AIS_ERR_TRY_AGAIN

==================================================
Feb 19 11:18:28 PL-4 osafimmnd[5422]: NO NODE STATE-> 
IMM_NODE_FULLY_AVAILABLE 17418
Feb 19 11:18:28 PL-4 osafimmloadd: NO Sync ending normally
Feb 19 11:18:28 PL-4 osafimmnd[5422]: NO Epoch set to 9 in ImmModel
Feb 19 11:18:28 PL-4 cpsv_app: IN Received PROC_STALE_CLIENTS
Feb 19 11:18:28 PL-4 osafimmnd[5422]: NO Implementer connected: 42 
(MsgQueueService132111) <108, 2040f>
Feb 19 11:18:28 PL-4 osafimmnd[5422]: NO Implementer connected: 43 
(MsgQueueService131855) <0, 2030f>
Feb 19 11:18:28 PL-4 osafimmnd[5422]: NO Implementer connected: 44 
(safLogService) <0, 2010f>
Feb 19 11:18:28 PL-4 osafimmnd[5422]: NO SERVER STATE: 
IMM_SERVER_SYNC_SERVER --> IMM_SERVER_READY
Feb 19 11:18:28 PL-4 osafimmnd[5422]: NO Implementer connected: 45 
(safClmService) <0, 2010f>
*Feb 19 11:18:28 PL-4 osafckptnd[7718]: ER cpnd clm init failed with 
return value:31**
**Feb 19 11:18:28 PL-4 osafckptnd[7718]: ER cpnd init failed **
**Feb 19 11:18:28 PL-4 osafckptnd[7718]: ER cpnd_lib_req FAILED**
**Feb 19 11:18:28 PL-4 osafckptnd[7718]: __init_cpnd() failed*
Feb 19 11:18:28 PL-4 osafclmna[5432]: NO 
safNode=PL-4,safCluster=myClmCluster Joined cluster, nodeid=2040f
Feb 19 11:18:28 PL-4 osafamfnd[5441]: NO AVD NEW_ACTIVE, adest:1
Feb 19 11:18:28 PL-4 osafamfnd[5441]: NO Sending node up due to 
NCSMDS_NEW_ACTIVE
Feb 19 11:18:28 PL-4 osafamfnd[5441]: NO 1 SISU states sent
Feb 19 11:18:28 PL-4 osafamfnd[5441]: NO 1 SU states sent
Feb 19 11:18:28 PL-4 osafamfnd[5441]: NO 7 CSICOMP states synced
Feb 19 11:18:28 PL-4 osafamfnd[5441]: NO 7 SU states sent
Feb 19 11:18:28 PL-4 osafimmnd[5422]: NO Implementer connected: 46 
(safAmfService) <0, 2010f>
Feb 19 11:18:30 PL-4 osafamfnd[5441]: NO 
'safSu=PL-4,safSg=NoRed,safApp=OpenSAF' Component or SU restart 
probation timer expired
Feb 19 11:18:35 PL-4 osafamfnd[5441]: NO Instantiation of 
'safComp=CPND,safSu=PL-4,safSg=NoRed,safApp=OpenSAF' failed
Feb 19 11:18:35 PL-4 osafamfnd[5441]: NO Reason: component registration 
timer expired
Feb 19 11:18:35 PL-4 osafamfnd[5441]: WA 
'safComp=CPND,safSu=PL-4,safSg=NoRed,safApp=OpenSAF' Presence State 
RESTARTING => INSTANTIATION_FAILED
Feb 19 11:18:35 PL-4 osafamfnd[5441]: NO Component Failover trigerred 
for 'safSu=PL-4,safSg=NoRed,safApp=OpenSAF': Failed component: 
'safComp=CPND,safSu=PL-4,safSg=NoRed,safApp=OpenSAF'
Feb 19 11:18:35 PL-4 osafamfnd[5441]: ER 
'safComp=CPND,safSu=PL-4,safSg=NoRed,safApp=OpenSAF'got Inst failed
Feb 19 11:18:35 PL-4 osafamfnd[5441]: Rebooting OpenSAF NodeId = 132111 
EE Name = , Reason: NCS component Instantiation failed, OwnNodeId = 
132111, SupervisionTime = 60
Feb 19 11:18:36 PL-4 opensaf_reboot: Rebooting local node; timeout=60
Feb 19 11:18:39 PL-4 kernel: [ 4877.338518] md: stopping all md devices.
==================================================

-AVM

On 2/15/2016 5:11 PM, Anders Widell wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Please find my answer inline, marked [AndersW].
>
> regards,
> Anders Widell
>
> On 02/15/2016 10:38 AM, Nhat Pham wrote:
>> Hi Mahesh,
>>
>> It's good. Thank you. :)
>>
>> [AVM]  Up on rejoining of the SC`s The replica should be re-created 
>> regardless
>> of another application opens it on PL4.
>>                ( Note : this comment is based on your explanation 
>> have not yet
>> reviewed/tested  ,
>>                   currently i am struggling with  SC`s    not rejoining
>> after headless state , i can provide you more on this once i complte my
>> review/testing)
>>
>> [Nhat] To make cloud resilience works, you need the patches from other
>> services (log, amf, clm, ntf).
>> @Minh: I heard that you created tar file which includes all patches. 
>> Could you
>> please send it to Mahesh? Thanks
>>
>> [AVM] I understand that , before I comment more on this   please 
>> allow me to
>> understand
>>               I am not still not very clear of the headless design in 
>> detail.
>>               For example cluster membership of PL`s   during 
>> headless state ,
>>                In the absence of  SC`s  (CLMD) dose the PLs is 
>> considered as
>> cluster nodes or not (cluster membership) ?
>>
>> [Nhat] I don't know much about this.
>> @ Anders: Could you please have comment about this? Thanks
> [AndersW] First of all, keep in mind that the "headless" state should 
> ideally not last a very long time. Once we have the spare SC feature 
> in place (ticket [#79]), a new SC should become active within a matter 
> of a few seconds after we have lost both the active and the standby SC.
>
> I think you should view the state of the cluster in the headless state 
> in the same way as you view the state of the cluster during a failover 
> between the active and the standby SC. Imagine that the active SC 
> dies. It takes the standby SC 1.5 seconds to detect the failure of the 
> active SC (this is due to the TIPC timeout). If you have configured 
> the PROMOTE_ACTIVE_TIMER, there is an additional delay before the 
> standby takes over as active. What is the state of the cluster during 
> the time after the active SC failed and before the standby takes over?
>
> The state of the cluster while it is headless is very similar. The 
> difference is that this state may last a little bit longer (though not 
> more than a few seconds, until one of the spare SCs becomes active). 
> Another difference is that we may have lost some state. With a 
> "perfect" implementation of the headless feature we should not lose 
> any state at all, but with the current set of patches we do lose state.
>
> So specifically if we talk about cluster membership and ask the 
> question: is a particular PL a member of the cluster or not during the 
> headless state? Well, if you ask CLM about this during the headless 
> state, then you will not know - because CLM doesn't provide any 
> service during the headless state. If you keep retrying you query to 
> CLM, you will eventually get an answer - but you will not get this 
> answer until there is an active SC again and we have exited the 
> headless state. When viewed in this way, the answer to the question 
> about a node's membership is undefined during the headless state, 
> since CLM will not provide you with any answer until there is an 
> active SC.
>
> However, if you asked CLM about the node's cluster membership status 
> before the cluster went headless, you probably saved a cached copy of 
> the cluster membership state. Maybe you also installed a CLM track 
> callback and intend to update this cached copy every time the cluster 
> membership status changes. The question then is: can you continue 
> using this cached copy of the cluster membership state during the 
> headless state? The answer is YES: since CLM doesn't provide any 
> service during the headless state, it also means that the cluster 
> membership view cannot change during this time. Nodes can of course 
> reboot or die, but CLM will not notice and hence the cluster view will 
> not be updated. You can argue that this is bad because the cluster 
> view doesn't reflect reality, but notice that this will always be the 
> case. We can never propagate information instantaneously, and 
> detection of node failures will take 1.5 seconds due to the TIPC 
> timeout. You can never be sure that a node is alive at this very 
> moment just because CLM tells you that it is a member of the cluster. 
> If we are unfortunate enough to lose both system controller nodes 
> simultaneously, updates to the cluster membership view will be delayed 
> a few seconds longer than usual.
>
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Nhat Pham
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: A V Mahesh [mailto:[email protected]]
>> Sent: Monday, February 15, 2016 11:19 AM
>> To: Nhat Pham <[email protected]>; [email protected]
>> Cc: [email protected]; 'Beatriz Brandao'
>> <[email protected]>
>> Subject: Re: [PATCH 0 of 1] Review Request for cpsv: Support 
>> preserving and
>> recovering checkpoint replicas during headless state V2 [#1621]
>>
>> Hi Nhat Pham,
>>
>> How is your holiday went
>>
>> Please find my comments below
>>
>> On 2/15/2016 8:43 AM, Nhat Pham wrote:
>>> Hi Mahesh,
>>>
>>> For the comment 1, the patch will be updated accordingly.
>> [AVM]  Please hold , I will provide more comments in this week , so 
>> we can
>> have consolidated V3
>>> For the comment 2, I think the CKPT service will not be backward
>>> compatible if the scAbsenceAllowed is true.
>>> The client can't create non-collocated checkpoint on SCs.
>>>
>>> Furthermore, this solution only protects the CKPT service from the
>>> case "The non-collocated checkpoint  is created on a SC"
>>> there are still the cases where the replicas are completely lost. Ex:
>>>
>>> - The non-collocated checkpoint created on a PL. The PL reboots. Both
>>> replicas now locate on SCs. Then, headless state happens. All 
>>> replicas are
>>> lost.
>>> - The non-collocated checkpoint has active replica locating on a PL
>>> and this PL restarts during headless state
>>> - The non-collocated checkpoint is created on PL3. This checkpoint is
>>> also opened on PL4. Then SCs and PL3 reboot.
>> [AVM]  Up on rejoining of the SC`s The replica should be re-created 
>> regardless
>> of another application opens it on PL4.
>>                ( Note : this comment is based on your explanation 
>> have not yet
>> reviewed/tested  ,
>>                   currently i am struggling with  SC`s    not rejoining
>> after headless state , i can provide you more on this once i complte my
>> review/testing)
>>> In this case, all replicas are lost and the client has to create it 
>>> again.
>>>
>>> In case multiple nodes (which including SCs) reboot, losing replicas
>>> is unpreventable. The patch is to recover the checkpoints in 
>>> possible cases.
>>> How do you think?
>> [AVM] I understand that , before I comment more on this   please allow
>> me to understand
>>               I am not still not very clear of the headless design in 
>> detail.
>>
>>               For example cluster membership of PL`s   during headless
>> state ,
>>                In the absence of  SC`s  (CLMD) dose the PLs is 
>> considered as
>> cluster nodes or not (cluster membership) ?
>>
>>                      - if not consider as  NON cluster nodes 
>> Checkpoint Service
>> API  should  leverage the SA Forum Cluster
>>                        Membership Service  and API's can fail with
>> SA_AIS_ERR_UNAVAILABLE
>>
>>                      - if considers as cluster nodes  we need to 
>> follow all the
>> defined rules which are defined in SAI-AIS-CKPT-B.02.02 specification
>>
>>               so give me some more time to review it completely , so 
>> that we
>> can  have consolidated patch V3
>>
>> -AVM
>>> Best regards,
>>> Nhat Pham
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: A V Mahesh [mailto:[email protected]]
>>> Sent: Friday, February 12, 2016 11:10 AM
>>> To: Nhat Pham <[email protected]>; [email protected]
>>> Cc: [email protected]; Beatriz Brandao
>>> <[email protected]>
>>> Subject: Re: [PATCH 0 of 1] Review Request for cpsv: Support
>>> preserving and recovering checkpoint replicas during headless state V2
>>> [#1621]
>>>
>>>
>>> Comment 2 :
>>>
>>> After incorporating the comment one all the Limitations should be
>>> prevented based on Hydra configuration is enabled in IMM status.
>>>
>>> Foe example :  if some application is trying to create
>>>
>>> non-collocated checkpoint active replica getting generated/locating on
>>> SC then ,regardless of the heads (SC`s) status exist not exist should
>>> return SA_AIS_ERR_NOT_SUPPORTED
>>>
>>> In other words, rather that allowing to created non-collocated
>>> checkpoint when
>>> heads(SC`s)  are exit , and non-collocated checkpoint getting
>>> unrecoverable after heads(SC`s) rejoins.
>>>
>>> ======================================================================
>>> =======================
>>>>     Limitation: The CKPT service doesn't support recovering 
>>>> checkpoints in
>>>>     following cases:
>>>>     . The checkpoint which is unlinked before headless.
>>>>     . The non-collocated checkpoint has active replica locating on SC.
>>>>     . The non-collocated checkpoint has active replica locating on 
>>>> a PL
>>>> and this PL
>>>>     restarts during headless state. In this cases, the checkpoint 
>>>> replica is
>>>>     destroyed. The fault code SA_AIS_ERR_BAD_HANDLE is returned 
>>>> when the
>>>> client
>>>>     accesses the checkpoint in these cases. The client must re-open 
>>>> the
>>>>     checkpoint.
>>> ======================================================================
>>> =======================
>>>
>>> -AVM
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2/11/2016 12:52 PM, A V Mahesh wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> I jut starred reviewing patch , I will be  giving comments as soon as
>>>> I crossover any , to save some time.
>>>>
>>>> Comment 1 :
>>>> This functionality should be under  checks if Hydra configuration is
>>>> enabled in IMM attrName =
>>>> const_cast<SaImmAttrNameT>("scAbsenceAllowed")
>>>>
>>>> Please see example how  LOG/AMF  services implemented it.
>>>>
>>>> -AVM
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 1/29/2016 1:02 PM, Nhat Pham wrote:
>>>>> Hi Mahesh,
>>>>>
>>>>> As described in the README, the CKPT service returns
>>>>> SA_AIS_ERR_TRY_AGAIN fault code in this case.
>>>>> I guess it's same for other services.
>>>>>
>>>>> @Anders: Could you please confirm this?
>>>>>
>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>> Nhat Pham
>>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: A V Mahesh [mailto:[email protected]]
>>>>> Sent: Friday, January 29, 2016 2:11 PM
>>>>> To: Nhat Pham <[email protected]>; [email protected]
>>>>> Cc: [email protected]
>>>>> Subject: Re: [PATCH 0 of 1] Review Request for cpsv: Support
>>>>> preserving and recovering checkpoint replicas during headless state
>>>>> V2 [#1621]
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> On 1/29/2016 11:45 AM, Nhat Pham wrote:
>>>>>>       -  The behavior of application will be consistent with other
>>>>>> saf services like imm/amf behavior  during headless state.
>>>>>> [Nhat] I'm not clear what you mean about "consistent"?
>>>>> In the obscene of  Director (SC's) , what is expected return values
>>>>> of SAF API should ( all services ) ,
>>>>>      which are not in aposition to  provide service at that moment.
>>>>>
>>>>> I think all services should return same  SAF ERRS., I thinks
>>>>> currently we don't have  it , may be  Anders Widel  will help us.
>>>>>
>>>>> -AVM
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 1/29/2016 11:45 AM, Nhat Pham wrote:
>>>>>> Hi Mahesh,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Please see the attachment for the README. Let me know if there is
>>>>>> any more information required.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regarding your comments:
>>>>>>       -  during headless state  applications may behave like during
>>>>>> CPND restart case [Nhat] Headless state and CPND restart are
>>>>>> different events. Thus, the behavior is different.
>>>>>> Headless state is a case where both SCs go down.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>       -  The behavior of application will be consistent with other
>>>>>> saf services like imm/amf behavior  during headless state.
>>>>>> [Nhat] I'm not clear what you mean about "consistent"?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>> Nhat Pham
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>> From: A V Mahesh [mailto:[email protected]]
>>>>>> Sent: Friday, January 29, 2016 11:12 AM
>>>>>> To: Nhat Pham <[email protected]>;
>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>> Cc: [email protected]
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [PATCH 0 of 1] Review Request for cpsv: Support
>>>>>> preserving and recovering checkpoint replicas during headless state
>>>>>> V2 [#1621]
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Nhat Pham,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I stared reviewing this patch , so can please provide README file
>>>>>> with scope and limitations , that will help to define
>>>>>> testing/reviewing scope .
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Following are minimum things we can keep in mind while
>>>>>> reviewing/accepting patch ,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - Not effecting existing functionality
>>>>>>       -  during headless state  applications may behave like during
>>>>>> CPND restart case
>>>>>>       -  The minimum functionally of application works
>>>>>>       -  The behavior of application will be consistent with
>>>>>>          other saf services like imm/amf behavior during headless 
>>>>>> state.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So please do provide any additional detailed in README if any of
>>>>>> the above is deviated , that allow users to know about the
>>>>>> limitations/deviation.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -AVM
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 1/4/2016 3:15 PM, Nhat Pham wrote:
>>>>>>> Summary: cpsv: Support preserving and recovering checkpoint
>>>>>>> replicas during headless state [#1621] Review request for Trac
>>>>>>> Ticket(s):
>>>>>>> #1621 Peer Reviewer(s): [email protected];
>>>>>>> [email protected] Pull request to:
>>>>>>> [email protected] Affected branch(es): 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 faec4a4445a4c23e8f630857b19aabb43b5af18d
>>>>>>> Author:    Nhat Pham <[email protected]>
>>>>>>> Date:    Mon, 04 Jan 2016 16:34:33 +0700
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>       cpsv: Support preserving and recovering checkpoint replicas
>>>>>>> during headless state [#1621]
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>       Background:
>>>>>>>       ---------- This enhancement supports to preserve checkpoint
>>>>>>> replicas
>>>>>> in case
>>>>>>>       both SCs down (headless state) and recover replicas in case
>>>>>>> one of
>>>>>> SCs up
>>>>>>>       again. If both SCs goes down, checkpoint replicas on
>>>>>>> surviving nodes
>>>>>> still
>>>>>>>       remain. When a SC is available again, surviving replicas are
>>>>>> automatically
>>>>>>>       registered to the SC checkpoint database. Content in
>>>>>>> surviving
>>>>>> replicas are
>>>>>>>       intacted and synchronized to new replicas.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>       When no SC is available, client API calls changing checkpoint
>>>>>> configuration
>>>>>>>       which requires SC communication, are rejected. Client API
>>>>>>> calls
>>>>>> reading and
>>>>>>>       writing existing checkpoint replicas still work.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>       Limitation: The CKPT service does not support recovering
>>>>>>> checkpoints
>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>       following cases:
>>>>>>>        - The checkpoint which is unlinked before headless.
>>>>>>>        - The non-collocated checkpoint has active replica locating
>>>>>>> on SC.
>>>>>>>        - The non-collocated checkpoint has active replica locating
>>>>>>> on a PL
>>>>>> and this
>>>>>>>       PL restarts during headless state. In this cases, the
>>>>>>> checkpoint
>>>>>> replica is
>>>>>>>       destroyed. The fault code SA_AIS_ERR_BAD_HANDLE is returned
>>>>>>> when the
>>>>>> client
>>>>>>>       accesses the checkpoint in these cases. The client must
>>>>>>> re-open the
>>>>>>>       checkpoint.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>       While in headless state, accessing checkpoint replicas does
>>>>>>> not work
>>>>>> if the
>>>>>>>       node which hosts the active replica goes down. It will back
>>>>>>> working
>>>>>> when a
>>>>>>>       SC available again.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>       Solution:
>>>>>>>       --------- The solution for this enhancement includes 2 parts:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>       1. To destroy un-recoverable checkpoint described above when
>>>>>>> both
>>>>>> SCs are
>>>>>>>       down: When both SCs are down, the CPND deletes un-recoverable
>>>>>> checkpoint
>>>>>>>       nodes and replicas on PLs. Then it requests CPA to destroy
>>>>>> corresponding
>>>>>>>       checkpoint node by using new message
>>>>>>> CPA_EVT_ND2A_CKPT_DESTROY
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>       2. To update CPD with checkpoint information When an active
>>>>>>> SC is up
>>>>>> after
>>>>>>>       headless, CPND will update CPD with checkpoint information by
>>>>>>> using
>>>>>> new
>>>>>>>       message CPD_EVT_ND2D_CKPT_INFO_UPDATE instead of using
>>>>>>>       CPD_EVT_ND2D_CKPT_CREATE. This is because the CPND will
>>>>>>> create new
>>>>>> ckpt_id
>>>>>>>       for the checkpoint which might be different with the current
>>>>>>> ckpt id
>>>>>> if the
>>>>>>>       CPD_EVT_ND2D_CKPT_CREATE is used. The CPD collects checkpoint
>>>>>> information
>>>>>>>       within 6s. During this updating time, following requests is
>>>>>>> rejected
>>>>>> with
>>>>>>>       fault code SA_AIS_ERR_TRY_AGAIN:
>>>>>>>       - CPD_EVT_ND2D_CKPT_CREATE
>>>>>>>       - CPD_EVT_ND2D_CKPT_UNLINK
>>>>>>>       - CPD_EVT_ND2D_ACTIVE_SET
>>>>>>>       - CPD_EVT_ND2D_CKPT_RDSET
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Complete diffstat:
>>>>>>> ------------------
>>>>>>>       osaf/libs/agents/saf/cpa/cpa_proc.c       |   52
>>>>>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>>>> osaf/libs/common/cpsv/cpsv_edu.c |   43
>>>>>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>>>> osaf/libs/common/cpsv/include/cpd_cb.h |    3 ++
>>>>>>>       osaf/libs/common/cpsv/include/cpd_imm.h   |    1 +
>>>>>>>       osaf/libs/common/cpsv/include/cpd_proc.h  |    7 ++++
>>>>>>>       osaf/libs/common/cpsv/include/cpd_tmr.h   |    3 +-
>>>>>>>       osaf/libs/common/cpsv/include/cpnd_cb.h   |    1 +
>>>>>>>       osaf/libs/common/cpsv/include/cpnd_init.h |    2 +
>>>>>>>       osaf/libs/common/cpsv/include/cpsv_evt.h  |   20 
>>>>>>> +++++++++++++
>>>>>>>       osaf/services/saf/cpsv/cpd/Makefile.am    |    3 +-
>>>>>>>       osaf/services/saf/cpsv/cpd/cpd_evt.c      |  229
>>>>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>>>  
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>>>  
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ++++
>>>>>>> osaf/services/saf/cpsv/cpd/cpd_imm.c |  112
>>>>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>>>  
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> osaf/services/saf/cpsv/cpd/cpd_init.c |   20 ++++++++++++-
>>>>>>>       osaf/services/saf/cpsv/cpd/cpd_proc.c     |  309
>>>>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>>>  
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>>>  
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>>>> osaf/services/saf/cpsv/cpd/cpd_tmr.c |    7 ++++
>>>>>>>       osaf/services/saf/cpsv/cpnd/cpnd_db.c     |   16 ++++++++++
>>>>>>>       osaf/services/saf/cpsv/cpnd/cpnd_evt.c    |   22 
>>>>>>> +++++++++++++++
>>>>>>>       osaf/services/saf/cpsv/cpnd/cpnd_init.c   |   23 
>>>>>>> ++++++++++++++-
>>>>>>>       osaf/services/saf/cpsv/cpnd/cpnd_mds.c    |   13 ++++++++
>>>>>>>       osaf/services/saf/cpsv/cpnd/cpnd_proc.c   |  314
>>>>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>>>  
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>>>  
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
>>>>>>>       20 files changed, 1189 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Testing Commands:
>>>>>>> -----------------
>>>>>>> -
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Testing, Expected Results:
>>>>>>> --------------------------
>>>>>>> -
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 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      n          n
>>>>>>> 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.
>>>>>>>
>>
>

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Site24x7 APM Insight: Get Deep Visibility into Application Performance
APM + Mobile APM + RUM: Monitor 3 App instances at just $35/Month
Monitor end-to-end web transactions and take corrective actions now
Troubleshoot faster and improve end-user experience. Signup Now!
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=272487151&iu=/4140
_______________________________________________
Opensaf-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel

Reply via email to