Summary: amfd: do not checkpoint the nway sg fsm in case of no change [#1697]
Review request for Trac Ticket(s): #1697
Peer Reviewer(s): Hans, Gary, Nagu, Praveen
Pull request to: Hans
Affected branch(es): all
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 n
Samples n
Tests n
Other n
Comments (indicate scope for each "y" above):
---------------------------------------------
<<EXPLAIN/COMMENT THE PATCH SERIES HERE>>
changeset 7cddf9680bc659520b66af80f1327a4c3bd995f3
Author: Quyen Dao <quyen....@dektech.com.au>
Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2016 17:26:07 +0700
amfd: do not checkpoint the nway sg fsm in case of no change [#1697]
After the nway application AMF entities are created, active amfd calls
avd_sg_nway_si_assign function to assign any unassigned SI but all SUs
are
locked so no SI are assigned and the FSM is still stable. In this
function,
it always checkpoints the nway sg fsm with state STABLE (at the
beginning of
the function) to standby even the fsm state is not changed. When the
standby
amfd receives the checkpoint message, it founds that the nway sg doesn't
exist in its database and does an assert to generate the coredump. The
nway
sg doesn't exist in standby is because checkpoint message arrives
before the
ccb_apply_ccb (which informs the nway sg creation) from immnd.
Object's checkpoint message arrives to standby when the corresponding
object
doesn't exist is a rare and race condition case, it needs a general
solution.
But to solve for this particular crash, it is changed to not checkpoint
the
nway sg fsm state as it's not changed (this is the correct behaviour and
aligned with other sg). Since nway sg fsm is not checkpointed because
of no
change, crash will not happen.
Complete diffstat:
------------------
osaf/services/saf/amf/amfd/sg_nway_fsm.cc | 1 -
1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
Testing Commands:
-----------------
<<LIST THE COMMAND LINE TOOLS/STEPS TO TEST YOUR CHANGES>>
Testing, Expected Results:
--------------------------
<<PASTE COMMAND OUTPUTS / TEST 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.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Transform Data into Opportunity.
Accelerate data analysis in your applications with
Intel Data Analytics Acceleration Library.
Click to learn more.
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=278785111&iu=/4140
_______________________________________________
Opensaf-devel mailing list
Opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel
