Summary: amfd: harden completed and apply delete callbacks [#2566] Review request for Ticket(s): 2566 Peer Reviewer(s): *** LIST THE TECH REVIEWER(S) / MAINTAINER(S) HERE *** Pull request to: *** LIST THE PERSON WITH PUSH ACCESS HERE *** Affected branch(es): develop, release Development branch: ticket-2566 Base revision: 04f5645083be86e56587bfdf3a5d496380147dba Personal repository: git://git.code.sf.net/u/userid-2226215/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): --------------------------------------------- revision 07fba116480e2c661869e083136cfcc9e58bd85f Author: Gary Lee <[email protected]> Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2017 15:41:24 +1000 amfd: harden completed and apply delete callbacks [#2566] It is possible for an object to be deleted in IMM, before a standby SC finishes initilization. Now, if the related callbacks are processed by the standby late, then unnecessary assertions or null pointer accesses may occur. Complete diffstat: ------------------ src/amf/amfd/cb.h | 1 + src/amf/amfd/comp.cc | 4 ++++ src/amf/amfd/compcstype.cc | 6 ++++++ src/amf/amfd/cstype.cc | 8 ++++++++ src/amf/amfd/hlt.cc | 7 +++++++ src/amf/amfd/node.cc | 11 +++++++++++ src/amf/amfd/nodeswbundle.cc | 3 +++ src/amf/amfd/sg.cc | 10 ++++++++++ src/amf/amfd/sgtype.cc | 10 ++++++++++ src/amf/amfd/su.cc | 14 ++++++++++++-- src/amf/amfd/sutype.cc | 7 +++++++ src/amf/amfd/svctype.cc | 8 ++++++++ src/amf/amfd/svctypecstypes.cc | 5 +++++ 13 files changed, 92 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) Testing Commands: ----------------- Ran examples described in ticket, no crash occurs. Testing, Expected Results: -------------------------- *** PASTE COMMAND OUTPUTS / TEST RESULTS *** 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 ~/.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
