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
