Summary:mds:non-root- don't delete pid info to avoid race condition if
re-registers [#1825]
Review request for Trac Ticket(s): #1825
Peer Reviewer(s): Mathi
Pull request to: Mahesh
Affected branch(es): defult , 4.x 5.x
Development branch: defult
--------------------------------
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):
---------------------------------------------
<<EXPLAIN/COMMENT THE PATCH SERIES HERE>>
changeset c326d5f3e8ea5ee50ef97d6a3e60917500e1aac4
Author: A V Mahesh <mahesh.va...@oracle.com>
Date: Wed, 01 Jun 2016 09:47:59 +0530
mds:non-root- don't delete pid info to avoid race condition if
re-registers
[#1825] MDS while deleting a down process completely, fist determines
the
process doesn't exist forever, if process not exist any more , then
only it
deletes the PID onfo ,to avoid race with a client that re-registers
immediately after unregistered. Currently this validation is not
fulfilling
NON-ROOT case , where we do get :
If PID exist :
OpenSAF process running as non-root - kill() returns -1 errno is EPERM
OpenSAF process running as root - kill() returns 0 errno is NONE
If PID NOT exist :
OpenSAF process running as as non-root - kill() returns -1 errno is
ESRCH
OpenSAF process running as as root - kill() returns -1 errno is ESRCH
So added additional validation to fulfill the not root case.
Complete diffstat:
------------------
osaf/libs/core/mds/mds_dt_common.c | 2 +-
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
Testing Commands:
-----------------
Complex to reproduce `
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 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.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What NetFlow Analyzer can do for you? Monitors network bandwidth and traffic
patterns at an interface-level. Reveals which users, apps, and protocols are
consuming the most bandwidth. Provides multi-vendor support for NetFlow,
J-Flow, sFlow and other flows. Make informed decisions using capacity
planning reports. https://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/305295220;132659582;e
_______________________________________________
Opensaf-devel mailing list
Opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel
