Hi Lennart,
I've run *test_ccbhdl* in OpenSAF UML cluster and the same core dump was
still generated as described in my previous mail.
My UML cluster was built and installed with the latest OpenSAF develop
commit (*5d8d104 rded: run controller promotion code in new thread
[#2857]*), and with your patch applied on top.
I debugged a little by removing the creation of the long-value
SA_IMM_ATTR_SANAMET attribute from the test (below code, at two places
in the test), and the test passed successfully with no core dump.
// Add a long name and a third short name
char long_name[300];
for (size_t i = 0; i < 299; i++) {
long_name[i] = 'a';
}
long_name[299] = '\0';
osaf_extended_name_lend(long_name, &a_name);
attribute.AddValue(modelmodify::SaNametToString(&a_name));
Testing further, I tried running a test campaign which included the
creation of a long-dn object, and the campaign also failed at such
creation (I did enable longDnsAllowed beforehand). Then, I tried testing
the same campaign after *reverting your 2nd increment for ticket #1398*
and the campaign completed successfully with the long-dn object created.
So I've doubted that the 2nd increment of #1398 might have introduced
the issue here.
Can you check/verify the patch again in consideration of my testing and
observation?
Thanks,
Nguyen
On 5/31/2018 7:33 PM, Lennart Lund wrote:
Hi Nguyen,
I have tried to reproduce the coredump but I have not succeeded. Did
you just run test_ccbhdl without any special settings?
I am testing in an OpenSAF UML cluster that is built and started using
the tools in …/tools/cluster_sim_uml/
I have also tested when the test class is not in the IMM model. The
test of course fail but no coredump. The fail happen in a controlled
and predictable way.
What kind of system are you using?
Thanks
Lennart
*From:*Nguyen Luu <nguyen.tk....@dektech.com.au>
*Sent:* den 31 maj 2018 11:10
*To:* Lennart Lund <lennart.l...@ericsson.com>
*Cc:* opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
*Subject:* Re: [PATCH 0/1] Review Request for smf: Validation error
for rollback CCB and a related core dump [#2858]
Hi Lennart,
I've reviewed and tested your patch.
- For the code review, please check comments in the attached diff file.
- For the testing, a core dump occurred when executing *test_ccbhdl*
(always reproducible). Test printouts, core dump backtrace, and syslog
as shown below. Looks like some issue with setting an extended-name
attribute of type SA_IMM_ATTR_SANAMET. Has this test passed in your
last run?
-----Terminal printouts-----
root@SC-1:~# test_ccbhdl
ccbhdl_test
IMM class used for test: ImmTestValuesConfig
Creating: Test1=1,safApp=safSmfService
Aborted (core dumped)
-----System logs-----
2018-05-31 16:02:35.873 SC-1 osafimmpbed: IN Create of class
ImmTestValuesConfig committing with ccbId:100000004
2018-05-31 16:02:35.889 SC-1 osafimmnd[207]: NO Create of class
ImmTestValuesConfig is PERSISTENT.
2018-05-31 16:02:35.908 SC-1 osafimmpbed: NO PBE allowing modification
to object opensafImm=opensafImm,safApp=safImmService
2018-05-31 16:02:35.922 SC-1 osafimmnd[207]: NO Ccb 2 COMMITTED
(immcfg_SC-1_487)
2018-05-31 16:02:35.934 SC-1 test_ccbhdl:
src/base/osaf_extended_name.c:144: osaf_extended_name_length:
Assertion 'osaf_extended_names_enabled && length >=
SA_MAX_UNEXTENDED_NAME_LENGTH' failed.
-----Core dump backtrace-----
(gdb) bt
#0 0x00007faf97b83428 in __GI_raise (sig=sig@entry=6) at
../sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/raise.c:54
#1 0x00007faf97b8502a in __GI_abort () at abort.c:89
#2 0x00007faf987034ab in __osafassert_fail
(__file=__file@entry=0x7faf9873275d "src/base/osaf_extended_name.c",
__line=__line@entry=144, __func=__func@entry=0x7faf987327f0
<__FUNCTION__.3368> "osaf_extended_name_length",
__assertion=__assertion@entry=0x7faf987327a8
"osaf_extended_names_enabled && length >= SA_MAX_UNEXTENDED_NAME_LENGTH")
at src/base/sysf_def.c:286
#3 0x00007faf986fef89 in osaf_extended_name_length
(name=0x564decae3796) at src/base/osaf_extended_name.c:143
#4 0x00007faf9895ef1d in imma_copyAttrValue
(p=p@entry=0x564decae2d00, attrValueType=SA_IMM_ATTR_SANAMET,
attrValue=0x564decae3796) at src/imm/agent/imma_init.cc:434
#5 0x00007faf9896b140 in ccb_object_create_common
(ccbHandle=1527757355930828673, className=<optimized out>,
parentName=0x7ffefbb72e20, objectName=<optimized out>,
objectName@entry=0x0, attrValues=attrValues@entry=0x7ffefbb72cf0)
at src/imm/agent/imma_om_api.cc:2079
#6 0x00007faf9896d8cf in saImmOmCcbObjectCreate_2
(ccbHandle=<optimized out>, className=<optimized out>,
parentName=<optimized out>,
attrValues=attrValues@entry=0x7ffefbb72cf0) at
src/imm/agent/imma_om_api.cc:1660
#7 0x0000564dea9df953 in
immom::ImmOmCcbObjectCreate::AddObjectCreateToCcb
(this=this@entry=0x7ffefbb72ff0)
at src/smf/smfd/imm_om_ccapi/om_ccb_object_create.cc:61
#8 0x0000564dea9d8d54 in modelmodify::AddCreateToCcb
(ccb_handle=@0x7ffefbb730c8: 1527757355930828673, create_descriptor=...)
at src/smf/smfd/imm_modify_config/add_operation_to_ccb.cc:103
#9 0x0000564dea9db26c in modelmodify::ModelModification::AddCreate
(this=this@entry=0x7ffefbb73870, create_descriptor=...)
at src/smf/smfd/imm_modify_config/immccb.cc:482
#10 0x0000564dea9dca8b in modelmodify::ModelModification::AddCreates
(this=this@entry=0x7ffefbb73870,
create_descriptors=std::vector of length 1, capacity 1 = {...}) at
src/smf/smfd/imm_modify_config/immccb.cc:455
#11 0x0000564dea9dce67 in
modelmodify::ModelModification::DoModelModification
(this=0x7ffefbb73870, modifications=...)
at src/smf/smfd/imm_modify_config/immccb.cc:107
#12 0x0000564dea9c61af in CreateOneObject () at
src/smf/smfd/imm_modify_demo/test_ccbhdl.cc:141
#13 0x0000564dea9bd36c in main () at
src/smf/smfd/imm_modify_demo/test_ccbhdl.cc:244
Thanks,
Nguyen
On 5/29/2018 9:40 PM, Lennart Lund wrote:
Summary: smf: Validation error for rollback CCB and a related core dump
[#2858]
Review request for Ticket(s): 2858
Peer Reviewer(s):nguyen.tk....@dektech.com.au
<mailto:nguyen.tk....@dektech.com.au>
Pull request to: *** LIST THE PERSON WITH PUSH ACCESS HERE ***
Affected branch(es): develop
Development branch: ticket-2858
Base revision: 1c4c6ad57fdf44b228ec83f777ae957e878f1d61
Personal repository: git://git.code.sf.net/u/elunlen/review
--------------------------------
Impacted areaImpact y/n
--------------------------------
Docsn
Build systemn
RPM/packagingn
Configuration filesn
Startup scriptsn
SAF servicesy
OpenSAF servicesn
Core librariesn
Samplesn
Testsn
Othern
Comments (indicate scope for each "y" above):
---------------------------------------------
The lists of IMM operations that are created in many places may contain
object
create operations for objects that already exists in the IMM model.
The lists may also contain more than one create operation for the same
object. If
a create operation for any of the duplicates is added to the CCB,
ERR_EXSIST will
be returned. To avoid this it must be checked for each create operation if
the IMM
model already contains the object and also that the same object create is
not added
twice to the CCB.
Also if a duplicate object to create is found the rollbackData that is
created
for all IMM operations must be deleted if the corresponding operation is a
duplicate. See doImmOperations() in SmfUtil.cc
The patch contains a new class that is used to check if an object to be
created
exist in the IMM model. This class can be found in the new
SmfUtils_ObjExist.*
files. A test program for the class is created and can be found in
.../imm_modify_demo/test_objexist.cc. A shell command, test_objexist, is
created
and installed if --enble-tests is used with the configure script.
To make sure duplicate object create requests is not added the ccb
descriptor is
updated so that a duplicate create descriptor is not added. The ccb
decriptor
AddCreate() method will also return false if a create descriptor is not
added. See
../imm_modify_config/immccb.h
revision cf93518e220de4e0b9053d46850d926ef0293f33
Author:Lennart Lund<lennart.l...@ericsson.com>
<mailto:lennart.l...@ericsson.com>
Date:Tue, 29 May 2018 15:47:05 +0200
smf: Validation error for rollback CCB and a related core dump [#2858]
SMF imm operation lists may contain duplicate create operations.
Fix, rollback data shall not be stored for duplicate operations and
duplicate operations shall not be added to the CCB.
Fix, crash in SmfUtil::doImmoperation if the CCB fails
Added Files:
------------
src/smf/smfd/imm_modify_demo/test_objexist.cc
src/smf/smfd/SmfUtils_ObjExist.cc
src/smf/smfd/SmfUtils_ObjExist.h
Complete diffstat:
------------------
opensaf.spec.in|3 +-
src/smf/Makefile.am|42 ++-
src/smf/smfd/SmfUtils.cc|72 ++++-
src/smf/smfd/SmfUtils_ObjExist.cc| 290 +++++++++++++++++++++
src/smf/smfd/SmfUtils_ObjExist.h|68 +++++
.../smfd/imm_modify_config/add_operation_to_ccb.cc |5 +-
src/smf/smfd/imm_modify_config/immccb.h|53 +++-
.../{ccbhdl_test.cc => test_ccbhdl.cc}|0
src/smf/smfd/imm_modify_demo/test_objexist.cc| 127 +++++++++
9 files changed, 633 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-)
Testing Commands:
-----------------
*** LIST THE COMMAND LINE TOOLS/STEPS TO TEST YOUR CHANGES ***
Testing, Expected Results:
--------------------------
*** PASTE COMMAND OUTPUTS / TEST RESULTS ***
Conditions of Submission:
-------------------------
*** HOW MANY DAYS BEFORE PUSHING, CONSENSUS ETC ***
ArchBuiltStartedLinux distro
-------------------------------------------
mipsnn
mips64nn
x86nn
x86_64nn
powerpcnn
powerpc64nn
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
Opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel
