Summary: amf: fix activeCompName in csiStateDescriptor used in CSI SET cbk [#2021] Review request for Trac Ticket(s): #2021 Peer Reviewer(s): AMF devs Pull request to: <<LIST THE PERSON WITH PUSH ACCESS HERE>> Affected branch(es): default and 5.1 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): --------------------------------------------- changeset 12202143a07cbb1a46ba48c8bbb99fae2c7f8b39 Author: praveen.malv...@oracle.com Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2016 15:08:37 +0530 amf: fix activeCompName in csiStateDescriptor used in CSI SET cbk [#2021] In the reported problem, active compname is improperly as \'sa\' in CSI SET callback for HA state. After setting activeCompName in standby descriptor, AMFND is wrongly calling osaf_extended_name_clear() for active descriptor. Since SaAmfCSIStateDescriptorT is a union, it clears the filled value. Along with the above problems there are other minor problems like: -AMFND is copying activecompName using osaf_extended_name_alloc() in agent message, only when it is an extended name. osaf_extended_name_alloc() should be done irrespective of short or long dn. -Agent should perform validation check on dn based on HA state of the CSI SET callback, as activecompname is not populated for all the HA states. -When above problems are fixed, one more problem pops up: a standby component gets its own name in activeCompName in CSI set callback for standby. There is a minor regression at AMFD. Patch fixes all these problems. Complete diffstat: ------------------ osaf/libs/agents/saf/amfa/ava_hdl.cc | 28 +++++++++++++++++++--------- osaf/libs/common/amf/n2avamsg.c | 14 ++++++-------- osaf/services/saf/amf/amfd/util.cc | 2 +- osaf/services/saf/amf/amfnd/comp.cc | 1 - 4 files changed, 26 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-) Testing Commands: ----------------- Tested for 2N model. Testing, Expected Results: -------------------------- Got correct name in CSI set callback. Conditions of Submission: ------------------------- Ack before 5.1RC2. 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. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Opensaf-devel mailing list Opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel