Summary: amfnd: fix amfnd crash during su and node level escalations [#1770] V2 Review request for Trac Ticket(s): #1770 Peer Reviewer(s): AMF 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): --------------------------------------------- Along with the fix reported in description of ticket, this V2 fixes the crash reported in commnet of the ticket. changeset d54d36af540ebe9364296568479cb34db50ed33e Author: [email protected] Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2016 12:01:12 +0530 amfnd: fix amfnd crash during su and node level escalations [#1770] V2 AMFND crashes during sufailover recovery which resulted because comp does not response with SA_AIS_OK for CSI remove callback in su lock operation. Applicable to sufailover, node-failover and node-switchover along with su- failover. AMFND calls oper_done logic multiple times. This logic must be called when AMFND has to respond to AMFD for pending assignments. In these recovery policies, AMFD will perform recovery of assignments on escalation request. So calling oper_done logic for these recoveries must be avoided in AMFND. There is also one more case when same crash is observed. If component faults with su-failover recovery after responding successfully for quiesced state during SU lock. Since AMFND responds successfully for the quiesced state, it gets removal of assignment. AMFND crashes during removal of assignment. Patach solves problem by resetting the pending assignment flag in SU for these recovery policies. AMFD will perform recovery when it gets recovery request from AMFND. For second crash, when AMFND gets removal of assignment during su-failover, it will discard removal of assignment. In both the cases, AMFD takes care of repyling for admin op as part ofr su-failover recovery. Complete diffstat: ------------------ osaf/services/saf/amf/amfnd/err.cc | 19 +++++++++++++++++++ osaf/services/saf/amf/amfnd/su.cc | 16 ++++++++++++++++ osaf/services/saf/amf/amfnd/susm.cc | 2 +- 3 files changed, 36 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) Testing Commands: ----------------- Tested as per ticket description and comment. Testing, Expected Results: -------------------------- No crash will be observed. Conditions of Submission: ------------------------- Ack from any reviewer. 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. http://sdm.link/zohomanageengine _______________________________________________ Opensaf-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel
