Hi Nagendra,

I guess it would be good, if the root cause is fixed not the side effects.


Regards

Surya


On Wednesday 03 May 2017 12:12 PM, Nagendra Kumar wrote:
> Hi Minh,
>               The patch looks ok to me.
>
> Thanks
> -Nagu
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: minh chau [mailto:[email protected]]
>> Sent: 28 April 2017 15:24
>> To: A V Mahesh; Suryanarayana.Garlapati; [email protected];
>> Nagendra Kumar; [email protected]; Praveen Malviya
>> Cc: [email protected]
>> Subject: Re: [devel] [PATCH 1/1] amfnd: Ignore second NCSMDS_DOWN
>> [#2436]
>>
>> Hi AMF maintainers,
>>
>> While waiting Mahesh checks whether another NCSMDS_DOWN(Vdest)
>> should come 3 mins after headless, can we have a look at this patch?
>> I think we need it to make AMFND safe.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Minh
>>
>> On 27/04/17 12:26, A V Mahesh wrote:
>>> Hi Minh chau,
>>>
>>> On 4/26/2017 5:43 PM, minh chau wrote:
>>>> - Stop both SCs, amfnd receives 2 NCSMDS_DOWN, one is Adest, one is
>>>> Vdest
>>> I don't seen unnatural events from MDS, as amfnd might have subsided
>>> for them.
>>> Currently  transport (MDS) functionality doesn't provide event
>>> differently for headless or non-headless and it is completely
>>> invisible to  MDS.
>>>
>>> I will go through this AMF case and will get back to you.
>>>
>>> -AVM
>>>
>>> On 4/26/2017 5:43 PM, minh chau wrote:
>>>> Hi Mahesh,
>>>>
>>>> The sequence is going like this:
>>>>
>>>> - Stop both SCs, amfnd receives 2 NCSMDS_DOWN, one is Adest, one is
>>>> Vdest. I guess at this point MDS tells that both standby and active
>>>> amfd are down?
>>>>      2017-04-26 21:13:52 PL-4 osafamfnd[413]: WA AMF director
>>>> unexpectedly crashed
>>>>
>>>> - Leave cluster in headless about 3 mins, amfnd receives another
>>>> NCSMDS_DOWN with Vdest, so MDS is telling no active amfd again?
>>>>      syslog:
>>>>      2017-04-26 21:16:52 PL-4 osafamfnd[413]: WA AMF director
>>>> unexpectedly crashed
>>>>
>>>>      mds log:
>>>>      <143>1 2017-04-26T21:16:52.873168+10:00 PL-4 osafamfnd 413
>>>> mds.log [meta sequenceId="9881"] >>
>> mds_mcm_await_active_tmr_expiry
>>>>      <142>1 2017-04-26T21:16:52.873183+10:00 PL-4 osafamfnd 413
>>>> mds.log [meta sequenceId="9882"] MCM:API: await_active_tmr expired
>>>> for svc_id = AVND(13) Subscribed to svc_id = AVD(12) on VDEST id = 1
>>>>      <143>1 2017-04-26T21:16:52.9453+10:00 PL-4 osafclmna 405 mds.log
>>>> [meta sequenceId="938"] >> mds_mcm_await_active_tmr_expiry
>>>>      <142>1 2017-04-26T21:16:52.945309+10:00 PL-4 osafclmna 405
>>>> mds.log [meta sequenceId="939"] MCM:API: await_active_tmr expired
>> for
>>>> svc_id = CLMNA(36) Subscribed to svc_id = CLMS(34) on VDEST id = 16
>>>>      <142>1 2017-04-26T21:16:52.945452+10:00 PL-4 osafsmfnd 454
>>>> mds.log [meta sequenceId="620"] MCM:API: svc_down :
>>>> await_active_tmr_expiry : svc_id = SMFND(31) on DEST id = 65535 got
>>>> DOWN for svc_id = SMFD(30) on VDEST id = 15
>>>>      <143>1 2017-04-26T21:16:52.945462+10:00 PL-4 osafsmfnd 454
>>>> mds.log [meta sequenceId="621"] << mds_mcm_await_active_tmr_expiry
>>>>      <143>1 2017-04-26T21:16:52.945938+10:00 PL-4 osafckptnd 432
>>>> mds.log [meta sequenceId="1547"] >>
>> mds_mcm_await_active_tmr_expiry
>>>>      <142>1 2017-04-26T21:16:52.945947+10:00 PL-4 osafckptnd 432
>>>> mds.log [meta sequenceId="1548"] MCM:API: await_active_tmr expired
>>>> for svc_id = CPND(17) Subscribed to svc_id = CPD(16) on VDEST id = 9
>>>>      <142>1 2017-04-26T21:16:52.946064+10:00 PL-4 osafckptnd 432
>>>> mds.log [meta sequenceId="1558"] MCM:API: svc_down :
>>>> await_active_tmr_expiry : svc_id = CPND(17) on DEST id = 65535 got
>>>> DOWN for svc_id = CPD(16) on VDEST id = 9
>>>>      <143>1 2017-04-26T21:16:52.946074+10:00 PL-4 osafckptnd 432
>>>> mds.log [meta sequenceId="1559"] <<
>> mds_mcm_await_active_tmr_expiry
>>>>      <143>1 2017-04-26T21:16:52.94611+10:00 PL-4 osafckptnd 432
>>>> mds.log [meta sequenceId="1562"] >>
>> mds_mcm_await_active_tmr_expiry
>>>>      <142>1 2017-04-26T21:16:52.946118+10:00 PL-4 osafckptnd 432
>>>> mds.log [meta sequenceId="1563"] MCM:API: await_active_tmr expired
>>>> for svc_id = CLMA(35) Subscribed to svc_id = CLMS(34) on VDEST id = 16
>>>>      <143>1 2017-04-26T21:16:52.955692+10:00 PL-4 osafimmnd 395
>>>> mds.log [meta sequenceId="30048"] >>
>> mds_mcm_await_active_tmr_expiry
>>>>      <142>1 2017-04-26T21:16:52.955698+10:00 PL-4 osafimmnd 395
>>>> mds.log [meta sequenceId="30049"] MCM:API: await_active_tmr expired
>>>> for svc_id = CLMA(35) Subscribed to svc_id = CLMS(34) on VDEST id = 16
>>>>      <142>1 2017-04-26T21:16:52.955765+10:00 PL-4 osafimmnd 395
>>>> mds.log [meta sequenceId="30059"] MCM:API: svc_down :
>>>> await_active_tmr_expiry : svc_id = CLMA(35) on DEST id = 65535 got
>>>> DOWN for svc_id = CLMS(34) on VDEST id = 16
>>>>      <143>1 2017-04-26T21:16:52.955775+10:00 PL-4 osafimmnd 395
>>>> mds.log [meta sequenceId="30060"] <<
>> mds_mcm_await_active_tmr_expiry
>>>> I guess the other node-director services also receive the 2nd
>>>> NCSMDS_DOWN(Vdest), but those services have no problem because of
>>>> service's logic (or likely ckptnd checks cb->is_cpd_up == true), so I
>>>> thought it would be AMF problem, until I see the points from
>>>> Suryanarayana. So the await_active_tmr is working as expected?
>>>>
>>>> thanks,
>>>> Minh
>>>>
>>>> On 26/04/17 17:11, A V Mahesh wrote:
>>>>> Hi Minh Chau,
>>>>>
>>>>> On 4/26/2017 12:05 PM, minh chau wrote:
>>>>>> amfnd will receive another NCSMDS_DOWN
>>>>> you mean  amfnd is receiving  NCSMDS_DOWN for same amfd twice ?
>>>>> or  amfnd is receiving  NCSMDS_DOWN for both  active amfd & standby
>>>>> amfd  ?
>>>>>
>>>>> -AVM
>>>>>
>>>>> On 4/26/2017 12:05 PM, minh chau wrote:
>>>>>> @Suryanarayana: I think this fix makes AMFND a bit defensive, but
>>>>>> let's see Mahesh's comments
>>>>>> @Mahesh: If getting NCSMDS_DOWN, then there's no active to wait,
>> so
>>>>>> MDS should stop this timer?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 26/04/17 15:45, Suryanarayana.Garlapati wrote:
>>>>>>> Might be i guess this fix needs to be done at the MDS level, not
>>>>>>> at the AMFND, taking into consideration that the cluster
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> has only two Controllers.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Timer which is getting started at MDS should not be started(if
>>>>>>> started should be stopped) in case of getting the down for both of
>>>>>>> the amfd's.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wednesday 26 April 2017 10:53 AM, Minh Chau wrote:
>>>>>>>> If cluster goes into headless stage and wait up to 3 mins which
>>>>>>>> is currently the timeout of MDS_AWAIT_ACTIVE_TMR_VAL, amfnd
>> will
>>>>>>>> receive another NCSMDS_DOWN, and then delete all buffered
>>>>>>>> messages. As a result, the headless recovery is impossible
>>>>>>>> because these buffered messages are deleted.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Patch ignores the second NCSMDS_DOWN.
>>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>>    src/amf/amfnd/di.cc | 7 +++++++
>>>>>>>>    1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> diff --git a/src/amf/amfnd/di.cc b/src/amf/amfnd/di.cc index
>>>>>>>> 627b31853..e06b9260d 100644
>>>>>>>> --- a/src/amf/amfnd/di.cc
>>>>>>>> +++ b/src/amf/amfnd/di.cc
>>>>>>>> @@ -638,6 +638,13 @@ uint32_t
>> avnd_evt_mds_avd_dn_evh(AVND_CB
>>>>>>>> *cb, AVND_EVT *evt) {
>>>>>>>>        }
>>>>>>>>      }
>>>>>>>>    +  // Ignore the second NCSMDS_DOWN which comes from timeout
>> of
>>>>>>>> +  // MDS_AWAIT_ACTIVE_TMR_VAL
>>>>>>>> +  if (cb->is_avd_down == true) {
>>>>>>>> +    TRACE_LEAVE();
>>>>>>>> +    return rc;
>>>>>>>> +  }
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>>      m_AVND_CB_AVD_UP_RESET(cb);
>>>>>>>>      cb->active_avd_adest = 0;
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>


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