Summary:mds-tcp: adjust the TCP fragamnet size according to new mds hdr size 
[#1694]
Review request for Trac Ticket(s): #1694
Peer Reviewer(s): Mathi
Pull request to: <<LIST THE PERSON WITH PUSH ACCESS HERE>>
Affected branch(es): 5.0 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            n
 OpenSAF services        n
 Core libraries          y
 Samples                 n
 Tests                   n
 Other                   n


Comments (indicate scope for each "y" above):
---------------------------------------------

changeset 76b10037e1f2b2c1085e08c1f0de49dfdffc3c34
Author: A V Mahesh <[email protected]>
Date:   Tue, 08 Mar 2016 09:09:31 +0530

        mds-tcp: adjust the TCP fragamnet size according to new mds hdr size 
[#1694]
        After the changes of MDS enhancement ticket #1522, MDS TCP application
        getting segmentation if application trying to send messge size > 65535

        Bug : MDS:TCP code changes included the node name as a part MDS TCP 
message
        header, but TCP fragment size macro was not tuned according to new MDS 
user
        data size

        Fix : TCP fragment size macro need to be tuned according to new MDS HDR
        size need to less HOST_NAME_MAX size from default 
MDS_DIRECT_BUF_MAXSIZE)


Complete diffstat:
------------------
 osaf/libs/core/include/mds_papi.h |  5 +++--
 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)


Testing Commands:
-----------------
teps to reproduce :   When we tested this I have done the following:

1.
Make sure there is a clean default branch with NO patches added
2.
hg update 7292
3.
make distclean
4.
./bootstrap.sh
5.
./configure --enable-tests
6.
make
7.
./build_uml
8.
./opensaf start

In cluster on any node:
logtest

This logtest always fail testcase 39 and 40 in suite 6 with
the following will fail:
logtest 6 39

==========================================
Log file size (0) is less than 65535
39 FAILED Modify: saLogStreamFixedLogRecordSize == 0, write a record = 65535 
bytes, OK (expected UNKNOWN, got SA_AIS_NOT_VALID);
logtest 6 40

==========================================
Log file size (0) is less than 65535
40 FAILED Modify: saLogStreamFixedLogRecordSize == 65535, Write a record = 
65535 bytes with special characters, OK (expected UNKNOWN, got 
SA_AIS_NOT_VALID);


Testing, Expected Results:
--------------------------
logtest testcase 39 and 40 in suite 6 should pass

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.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Transform Data into Opportunity.
Accelerate data analysis in your applications with
Intel Data Analytics Acceleration Library.
Click to learn more.
http://makebettercode.com/inteldaal-eval
_______________________________________________
Opensaf-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel

Reply via email to