Summary: amfd: execute imm jobs based on latest status of attributes and objects[#2009] V2 Review request for Trac Ticket(s): #2009 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): --------------------------------------------- Incorprates comments. changeset fe6dc2c31c0ca79aa46abdf380a1fe288fd07242 Author: Praveen Malviya <[email protected]> Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2016 12:41:07 +0530 amfd: execute imm jobs based on latest status of attributes and objects[#2009] V2 V2:Incorporated comments given by Gary. App Si is moving to UNASSIGNED state after middleware failover. Standby controller maintains a job queue for SU, SISU and COMPCSI. In job queue both old and new state of a object or attribute will be present. The issue is not observed normally because standby will update correct state eventually from old to new. In the cases mentioned in the ticket: -in one case, SI was deleted. Because of this after failover, IMM returns failure for creating the SISU because this new active AMFD is executing old job. -in other case, Su was deleted and was added with new state. Here also after failover new active AMFD updates IMM with old state as it is executing old job. Patch fixes the problem by: -remebering if job was created in active or stadby state of AMFD. -After failover if new active finds some job that was created in standby state, it checks the status of objects or attributes and based on that job will be executed with latest values or simple deleted. Complete diffstat: ------------------ osaf/services/saf/amf/amfd/ckpt_updt.cc | 4 + osaf/services/saf/amf/amfd/imm.cc | 386 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- osaf/services/saf/amf/amfd/include/imm.h | 22 ++++- osaf/services/saf/amf/amfd/include/util.h | 2 + osaf/services/saf/amf/amfd/siass.cc | 7 +- osaf/services/saf/amf/amfd/util.cc | 28 ++++++ 6 files changed, 438 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-) Testing Commands: ----------------- <<LIST THE COMMAND LINE TOOLS/STEPS TO TEST YOUR CHANGES>> Testing, Expected Results: -------------------------- <<PASTE COMMAND OUTPUTS / TEST RESULTS>> Conditions of Submission: ------------------------- <<HOW MANY DAYS BEFORE PUSHING, CONSENSUS ETC>> Arch Built Started Linux distro ------------------------------------------- mips n n mips64 n n x86 y y x86_64 n n 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. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Developer Access Program for Intel Xeon Phi Processors Access to Intel Xeon Phi processor-based developer platforms. With one year of Intel Parallel Studio XE. Training and support from Colfax. Order your platform today. http://sdm.link/xeonphi _______________________________________________ Opensaf-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel
