Hi Gary, The ticket number seems to be wrong. It must be #2216. Please confirm.
Thanks, Praveen On 06-Dec-16 9:20 AM, Gary Lee wrote: > Summary: amfd: remove redundant notifications to RDE [#2115] > Review request for Trac Ticket(s): 2115 > Peer Reviewer(s): AndersW, AMF devs > Pull request to: <<LIST THE PERSON WITH PUSH ACCESS HERE>> > Affected branch(es): all > Development branch: default > > -------------------------------- > 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): > --------------------------------------------- > <<EXPLAIN/COMMENT THE PATCH SERIES HERE>> > > changeset 420fec0f9979800d1b7510d4ae32565fb61fe83a > Author: Gary Lee <[email protected]> > Date: Tue, 06 Dec 2016 14:43:08 +1100 > > amfd: remove redundant notifications to RDE [#2115] > > Currently, RDE uses AMF callbacks from AMFND and pcs_rda_requests from > AMFD > to determine its role. During a controller switch, this can be observed > on > the active controller: > > Dec 2 03:56:27 SC-2 osafrded[9582]: NO RDE role set to QUIESCED Dec 2 > 03:56:28 SC-2 osafrded[9582]: NO RDE role set to STANDBY Dec 2 03:56:32 > SC-2 > osafrded[9582]: NO RDE role set to QUIESCED Dec 2 03:56:37 SC-2 > osafrded[9582]: NO RDE role set to STANDBY > > The first two are a result of AMF callbacks, and last two from > pcs_rda_request. The last two will result in confusing callbacks to RDE > clients. > > During active->quiesced and quiesced->standby transitions, RDE will > already > have received CSI callbacks. There is no need for amfd to inform RDE > again. > > > Complete diffstat: > ------------------ > osaf/services/saf/amf/amfd/role.cc | 8 -------- > 1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) > > > Testing Commands: > ----------------- > amf-adm si-swap safSi=SC-2N,safApp=OpenSAF > > Testing, Expected Results: > -------------------------- > Check syslog on (old) active controller. > > Make sure it only shows: > > Dec 2 03:56:27 SC-2 osafrded[9582]: NO RDE role set to QUIESCED > Dec 2 03:56:28 SC-2 osafrded[9582]: NO RDE role set to STANDBY > > Conditions of Submission: > ------------------------- > <<HOW MANY DAYS BEFORE PUSHING, CONSENSUS ETC>> > > > 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. > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 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
