Summary: smfd: fix race condition during campaign commit Review request for Trac Ticket(s): 2413 Peer Reviewer(s): rafael, lennart, neel Pull request to: Affected branch(es): default Development branch:
-------------------------------- 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): --------------------------------------------- changeset b851b5c11b42cac99930dd30bf8f2b23351c25d0 Author: Alex Jones <ajo...@genband.com> Date: Thu, 06 Apr 2017 14:19:50 -0400 smfd: fix race condition when detecting async failures [#2413] smfd core dumps during commit of campaign. If an AMF SU under maintenance fails right as the campaign commit is done, there is a race condition present. Before SMF clears the suMaintenaceCampaign attribute of the SU, if the SU fails, it will send a notification. Meanwhile, the commit deletes upgrade campaign pointer inside smfd. If the deletion of the campaign pointer inside smfd occurs before it receives the NTF event a crash will occur because the campaign pointer is gone. Solution is to always process NTF events before processing the termination of the campaign. The campaign termination code sets "m_running" to false, and deletes the pointer. This should always be last in the poll loop so that the loop will exit immediately without processing any NTF events (or other future events.) Complete diffstat: ------------------ src/smf/smfd/SmfCampaignThread.cc | 16 ++++++++++------ 1 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) Testing Commands: ----------------- (1) run a campaign and let it get to completed state (2) commit and at the same time kill a component with suMaintenanceCampaign set Testing, Expected Results: -------------------------- smfd should not core Conditions of Submission: ------------------------- 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