On 02-Aug-16 3:39 AM, minh chau wrote: > Hi Praveen, > > One comment with [Minh] in line. > > Thanks, > Minh > > On 01/08/16 17:22, Gary Lee wrote: >> Hi Praveen >> >> On 1/08/2016 4:29 PM, praveen malviya wrote: >>> Hi Gary, Long, >>> >>> Some comments/observations: >>> -In AMFD saAisNameBorrow() is used in logging and AMFND uses >>> osaf_extended_name_borrow(). >>> For osaf_extended_name_borrow() note in osaf_extended_name.h says it >>> is intended for mainly agent libraries. But middle-ware services >>> always use core libs. At the same time saAisNameBorrow(), I think, is >>> for application. >>> any reason of using them this way and what is the recommended way? >> I think I used both styles in amfd. I think we can change saAisNameXX >> to osaf_extended_name_XX just before pushing, to make it consistent >> with the rest of the OpenSAF services. >>> -I think, one case may arrive from upgrade perspective. >>> Suppose any application (say amf_demo app) is running without >>> enabling long dn and a csi, with its RDn greater than 256, is added >>> dynamically (long dn enabled in IMM). In this case AMFD will assign >>> this csi to the running component. Component will not be able to read >>> the CSI and may crash. >>> This is related to invocation of CSI_SET callback but same will be >>> valid for PG tracking also. There may be other cases also. >>> Even truncation will not work in this case. > [Minh] I think the agent patch that Gary submitted currently returns > SA_AIS_ERR_NAME_TOO_LONG in saAmfDispatch() if long DN callback comes to > legacy application (unadapted long DN app). The real callback won't be > issued but application may crash if it exit() on non-SA_AIS_OK from > Dispatch(). I guess you have seen this with #1553? Do you think it's > good way if amf agent drops the long DN callback and also Dispatch() > returns OK to legacy app, and print error in syslog? Not observed in the context of #1553, but I remember about such a fix in NTF long dn changes. Returning SA_AIS_OK in Dispatch() call saves application from crash, but the problem in AMF is still different as it will maintain a COMPCSI relationship without comp being actually assigned for that.
Can we think of a way where AMF will not allow this conf change by rejecting the CCB operation itself. For this AMF should know that this application supports Long dn or not. But this information needs to be carried from agent to AMFD. Before going for such a way, I think, we can ask opinion from other AMF maintainers. Thanks, Praveen >>> - While running some tests observed crashes in amfnd and amfd. >>> I will update #1642 with bt information. >> Minh will answer this bit. >> >> Thanks >> Gary >> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Opensaf-devel mailing list Opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel
