Hi Anders,
ack for the series, code review and some basic tests. This solution
relies on IMM and perhaps in the future this should be
handled by CLMs instead.
/Regards HansN
On 10/27/2017 02:36 PM, Anders Widell wrote:
Summary: osaf: Divide the safe reboot into two phases [#2542]
Review request for Ticket(s): 2542
Peer Reviewer(s): Hans
Pull request to:
Affected branch(es): develop
Development branch: ticket-2542
Base revision: 2a7a20bafa7f189fca79bd73e6d678c58fda64dd
Personal repository: git://git.code.sf.net/u/anders-w/review
--------------------------------
Impacted area Impact y/n
--------------------------------
Docs n
Build system n
RPM/packaging n
Configuration files n
Startup scripts n
SAF services n
OpenSAF services n
Core libraries y
Samples n
Tests n
Other y
Comments (indicate scope for each "y" above):
---------------------------------------------
revision eedbc2ed68294bd9b4f1fe42baa382c800df7e1d
Author: Anders Widell <[email protected]>
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2017 14:28:29 +0200
clm: Call opensaf_reboot_prepare() so that fallback reboot will work [#2542]
The fallback reboot mechanism requires write permission to the SysRq proc
interface, so we must call opensaf_reboot_prepare() before daemonize() to make
sure it works properly.
revision 35740d4f914b4ea241395e16c6667df4cc87eeca
Author: Anders Widell <[email protected]>
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2017 14:28:23 +0200
base: Use fallback reboot when safe reboot fails [#2542]
If the shutdown -r command fails, either by returning an error code immediately,
or by not completing the reboot within one minute, we will call the failfast
reboot mechanism to make sure the node reboots.
revision 6d590ec8bdedbfdc970b076860525b1870c0701d
Author: Anders Widell <[email protected]>
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2017 13:32:14 +0200
osaf: Divide the safe reboot into two phases [#2542]
Divide the safe reboot in the opensaf_reboot script into two phases: in the
first phase we stop important OpenSAF services (currently only IMM), and in the
second phase we reboot the nodes.
Complete diffstat:
------------------
scripts/opensaf_reboot | 7 +++++++
src/base/Makefile.am | 3 +--
src/base/osaf_utility.c | 6 ++++++
src/base/tests/osaf_clock_gettime_test.cc | 5 +++++
src/clm/clmd/clms_main.c | 2 ++
src/clm/clmnd/main.c | 2 ++
6 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
Testing Commands:
-----------------
Test the CLM cluster reset admin operation.
Testing, Expected Results:
--------------------------
The cluster reset shall now be divided into two phases.
Conditions of Submission:
-------------------------
Ack from reviewer(s)
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
