Summary: amfd: SG admin state is nor honored during node group 
unlock_instantiation [#2324]
Review request for Trac Ticket(s): 2324
Peer Reviewer(s): Hans, Praveen
Pull request to: <<LIST THE PERSON WITH PUSH ACCESS HERE>>
Affected branch(es): all branches
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):
---------------------------------------------
 This patch fixes the issue where SUs are automatically instantiated during 
node group
 unlock-in by also checking for the SG admin state.

changeset e6b65775a7d08477ced0ba6dcc0c19e95544d4bd
Author: Tai Dinh <[email protected]>
Date:   Wed, 01 Mar 2017 18:05:20 +0700

        amfd: SG admin state is nor honored during node group 
unlock_instantiation
        [#2324]

        During instantiation of node group, AMF does not check for the admin 
state
        of the SG of SUs lead to the result that SUs will be instantiated even 
if
        their SG is at LOCKED_INSTANTIATION state.


Complete diffstat:
------------------
 src/amf/amfd/nodegroup.cc |  4 ++++
 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)


Testing Commands:
-----------------
 (1) Lock/lock-in SG
 (2) Lock/lock-in node group that the SG or its SUs is hosted on
 (3) Unlock-in the node group


Testing, Expected Results:
--------------------------
 The SG's SUs presence state should be kept at UNINSTANTIATED. All other SUs 
should be
 INSTANTIATED


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.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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