Summary: amfnd: Do not delete cbk info if csi is in assigning state while 
shutting down [#2316]
Review request for Trac Ticket(s): 2316
Peer Reviewer(s): AMF maintainers
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 ae0f5f056ef7334ce406d713038f7b4bc903d495
Author: Minh Hon Chau <[email protected]>
Date:   Tue, 28 Feb 2017 13:30:06 +1100

        amfnd: Do not delete cbk info if csi is in assigning state while 
shutting
        down [#2316]

        If node is shutting down, and csi is in assigning state, amfnd deletes 
cbk
        info which is waiting for response of pending callback. When component
        responds and cbk is deleted, amfnd can not remove csi assignment. Thus,
        amfnd gets stuck in shutting down.

        Patch makes amfnd not delete cbk info if csi is in assigning state,
        respectively variable pending_removal is true, and keep cbk info 
deleted in
        all other cases.


Complete diffstat:
------------------
 src/amf/amfnd/comp.cc |  13 ++++++++++---
 1 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)


Testing Commands:
-----------------
 TC1: Component restart due to fault before node is shutting down (as per 
ticket)
 TC2: Component restart by admin operation before node is shutting down
      - Load 2N model
      - Run admin operation restart component of SU (standby for example)
      - Delay csi set standby callback
      - opensafd stop
      - Release csi set callback
 TC3: Add new csi before node is shutting down
      - Load 2N model
      - Add extra csi for assigned SU
      - Delay csi set standby callback
      - opensafd stop
      - Release csi set callback
 TC4: Delete csi before node is shutting down
      - Load 2N model
      - Add extra csi for assigned SU, new csi is assigned
      - Delete this new csi
      - Delay csi remove callback
      - opensafd stop
      - Release csi remove callback
 TC5: Lock SI before node is shutting down
      - Load 2N model
      - Lock SI
      - Delay csi remove callback
      - opensafd stop
      - Release csi remove callback


Testing, Expected Results:
--------------------------
 all tests pass


Conditions of Submission:
-------------------------
 ack from reviewer


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
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel

Reply via email to