Summary: amfd: fix amfd crashes related to NG[#1766].
Review request for Trac Ticket(s): #1766
Peer Reviewer(s): AMFD devs
Pull request to: <<LIST THE PERSON WITH PUSH ACCESS HERE>>
Affected branch(es): ALL
Development branch: <<IF ANY GIVE THE REPO URL>>
--------------------------------
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):
---------------------------------------------
There two patches here:
-First patch is being republished. Hans N had worked on it and published it
earliar.
It fixes the crash in the description.
-Second patch is for the crash reported in the commnet part of ticket.
changeset a946b07ede8eac6032fb55c3527ee1401fa3d2f9
Author: [email protected]
Date: Thu, 09 Jun 2016 15:42:10 +0530
amfd: Segv in ng_ccb_completed_delete_hdlr [#1766]
Note: This patch is work of Hans N and it is for the crash given in the
description of ticket #1766.
When running SMF tests that creates and deletes nodegrups, the
nodegroup_db
sometimes do not contain the nodegroup given in parameter
opdata->objectName.
changeset 35b83be24a84818f1125f0e1921e6f9ec13f27b4
Author: [email protected]
Date: Thu, 09 Jun 2016 15:43:34 +0530
amfd: fix amfd crash while decoding NG admin state [#1766]
Standby AMFD may get MBCSV checkpoint update for NG admin state after
deletion of nodegroup through CCB. The only possibility for this is:
-A user performs admin operation on NG and deletes it instantaneously.
If
mvcsv checkpoint comes after CCB operations then standby amfd will
assert in
dec_ng_admin_state().
As a fix, standby AMFD must update only ckpt update count and avoid
assert.
Complete diffstat:
------------------
osaf/services/saf/amf/amfd/ckpt_dec.cc | 6 +++++-
osaf/services/saf/amf/amfd/nodegroup.cc | 10 ++++++++++
osaf/services/saf/amf/amfd/su.cc | 12 +++++++++++-
3 files changed, 26 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
Testing Commands:
-----------------
Not able to reproduce the problem.
Patch is prepared on the basis of code analysis and recent patches in this
area.
Testing, Expected Results:
--------------------------
<<PASTE COMMAND OUTPUTS / TEST RESULTS>>
Conditions of Submission:
-------------------------
Ack from anyone.
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
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel
