Dear Mahesh,
>> So we can always re-use the existing UN-linked resources by just simply removing UN-link flag, >> what is your opinion? Based on my understanding, new checkpoint even has the same name but might have different attribute (collocated/non-collocated) and be opened from different node make the way we manage replicas become complicated. I fear that will cost more work that Nhat's solution. Thank you and best regards, Hoang From: A V Mahesh [mailto:mahesh.va...@oracle.com] Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2017 2:29 PM To: Hoang Vo <hoang.m...@dektech.com.au>; zoran.milinko...@ericsson.com Cc: opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [PATCH 0 of 1] Review Request for cpsv: Update ckpt_reploc_tree when unlinking a checkpoint [#1655 HiHoang, >>The replica IMM objects are not created after opening a checkpoint in following scenario: 1. Open a checkpoint with flag SA_CKPT_CHECKPOINT_CREATE 2. Unlink the checkpoint ( the checkpoint is still being used) 3. Open a checkpoint with flag SA_CKPT_CHECKPOINT_CREATE with same name as the on in 1. >>After 3. although the checkpoint is opened successfully, the replica IMM objects are not created. As I Know CKPT specification doesn't say , if checkpoint is reopened with same name which is currently in UN-linked state and not yet expired/cleaned an new instance should be created . So we can always re-use the existing UN-linked resources by just simply removing UN-link flag, what is your opinion? -AVM On 1/19/2017 12:37 PM, Hoang Vo wrote: Summary: cpsv: Update ckpt_reploc_tree when unlinking a checkpoint [#1655] Review request for Trac Ticket(s): 1655 Peer Reviewer(s): mahesh.va...@oracle.com <mailto:mahesh.va...@oracle.com> ; zoran.milinko...@ericsson.com <mailto:zoran.milinko...@ericsson.com> Pull request to: mahesh.va...@oracle.com <mailto:mahesh.va...@oracle.com> Affected branch(es): default 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): --------------------------------------------- Rebase patch to latest folder structure, do not change any source code inside Patched after 1765 changeset 6ffeaa4fbf2e352bd42a4bba160c4c593efcf749 Author: Hoang Vo <mailto:hoang.m...@dektech.com.au> <hoang.m...@dektech.com.au> Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2017 13:59:09 +0700 Problem: -------- The replica IMM objects are not created after opening a checkpoint in following scenario: 1. Open a checkpoint with flag SA_CKPT_CHECKPOINT_CREATE 2. Unlink the checkpoint ( the checkpoint is still being used) 3. Open a checkpoint with flag SA_CKPT_CHECKPOINT_CREATE with same name as the one in 1. After step 3. although the checkpoint is opened successfully, the replica IMM objects are not created. The problem happens because the CPD does not delete relating nodes from ckpt_reploc_tree when it unlinks the checkpoint in step 2. Solution: --------- The solution is to remove replica location node of that checkpoint from the ckpt_reploc_tree when unlinking the checkpoint. Complete diffstat: ------------------ src/ckpt/ckptd/cpd_db.c | 4 ++++ src/ckpt/ckptd/cpd_proc.c | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 2 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) Testing Commands: ----------------- Follow testing step specified in the ticket 1655 Testing, Expected Results: -------------------------- Refer the ticket 1655 description for expected result Conditions of Submission: ------------------------- ACK from maintainer 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. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot _______________________________________________ Opensaf-devel mailing list Opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel
