Summary: ntfd: Ensure mutex is not taken after cnsurvail_thread is canceled [#2508] Review request for Ticket(s): 2508 Peer Reviewer(s): Lennart, Praveen Pull request to: *** LIST THE PERSON WITH PUSH ACCESS HERE *** Affected branch(es): develop Development branch: ticket-2508 Base revision: 829519a4f3a86eb836a55be8301fd5d2befeeec3 Personal repository: git://git.code.sf.net/u/minh-chau/review
-------------------------------- 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 *** revision b5f1013b5bfae062d2a3dce60b621f810e64b5f4 Author: Minh Chau <[email protected]> Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2017 14:05:04 +1000 ntfd: Ensure mutex is not taken after cnsurvail_thread is canceled [#2508] In the scenario of shutting down SC while SC switchover is on going, ntfd coredump is generated due to failure of pthread_mutex_destroy() with errorcode:16(EBUSY). That means the mutex had been taken and was not unlocked at the time phtread_mutex_destroy() is called. One solution is adding mutex protection for pthread_cancel() so that there's no cancellation request if cnsurvail_thread() is taking mutex, or cnsurvail_thread() can not take mutex if the thread cancellation request is issued. That also needs the cnsurvail_thread to have the cancellation type as ASYNCHORNOUS. Otherwise the same coredump issue still occurs since the cancellation request is deffered (cancellation type as PTHREAD_CANCEL_DEFERRED set by default) Complete diffstat: ------------------ src/ntf/ntfd/ntfs_imcnutil.c | 6 ++++++ 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+) Testing Commands: ----------------- Run a test of switchover and shutting down SC multiple times (It was 20 times of test execution that triggered to ntfd coredump) Testing, Expected Results: -------------------------- No coredump Conditions of Submission: ------------------------- ack from reviewers 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 ~/.gitconfig file (i.e. user.name, user.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
