[devel] [PATCH 1 of 1] imm: Wait for veterans when IMMD starts [#1698]

2016-03-09 Thread Hung Nguyen
osaf/services/saf/immsv/immd/immd_cb.h | 3 ++ osaf/services/saf/immsv/immd/immd_main.c | 36 --- osaf/services/saf/immsv/immd/immd_mds.c | 20 - 3 files changed, 53 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) IMMD will wait for intro message from veterans an

[devel] [PATCH 0 of 1] Review Request for imm: Wait for veterans when IMMD starts [#1698]

2016-03-09 Thread Hung Nguyen
Summary: imm: Wait for veterans when IMMD starts [#1698] Review request for Trac Ticket(s): 1698 Peer Reviewer(s): Zoran, Neel Pull request to: Affected branch(es): 5.0 Development branch: 5.0 Impacted area Impact y/n Docs

Re: [devel] [PATCH 0 of 5] Review Request for Add cloud resilience support [#1180] V2

2016-03-09 Thread minh chau
Hi Lennart, Thanks for you finding. In future I think we need to add more ntftest cases for using NTF API in threads concurrently. We had a few. I will publish next version patch Thanks, Minh On 09/03/16 22:57, Lennart Lund wrote: > Hi Minh, > > I found a function checkNtfServerState() that rea

Re: [devel] Proof Of Concept patch reusing SG FSM code for better handling of transient nodes during headless state(was Re: [PATCH 01 of 15] amfd: Add support for cloud resilience at common libs [#162

2016-03-09 Thread minh chau
Hi Praveen Thanks for PoC patch, I have been reading your patch, and here is my understanding, please correct me if I am wrong. The approach of the patch in general is trying to pretend there's no headless gap, the operations before headless will resume after SC comes back. To achieve this, nod

Re: [devel] [PATCH 0 of 5] Review Request for Add cloud resilience support [#1180] V2

2016-03-09 Thread Vu Minh Nguyen
Ack for the series. Regards, Vu. >-Original Message- >From: Minh Hon Chau [mailto:minh.c...@dektech.com.au] >Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2016 2:30 PM >To: lennart.l...@ericsson.com; praveen.malv...@oracle.com; >vu.m.ngu...@dektech.com.au; minh.c...@dektech.com.au >Cc: opensaf-devel@lists.sou

Re: [devel] [PATCH 0 of 5] Review Request for Add cloud resilience support [#1180] V2

2016-03-09 Thread Lennart Lund
Hi Minh, I found a function checkNtfServerState() that read the global ntfa_ntfsv_state variable. This function does not protect the variable with a mutex. The corresponding ntfa_update_ntfsv_state() is called when mutex is locked but the checkNtfServerState() is not, this is not thread safe.

Re: [devel] [PATCH 1 of 5] NTF: Add support cloud resilience for NTF libs common [#1180]

2016-03-09 Thread praveen malviya
Ack for the series with minor comments below: -Most of the information of README must go in PR doc especially unavailability of old alarms through reader APIs after headless state is observed. -I think recovery of clients must be done as early as possible after first controller joins. For this

Re: [devel] [PATCH 1 of 1] log: log agent library is not backward compatible [#1686]

2016-03-09 Thread Mathivanan Naickan Palanivelu
Good that you provided the description. Ack, Mathi. - vu.m.ngu...@dektech.com.au wrote: > osaf/libs/agents/saf/lga/lga_mds.c | 42 > - > 1 files changed, 36 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) > > > The log agent on defaul branch (5.0) was not backward compat

[devel] [PATCH 1 of 1] amfd: do not checkpoint the nway sg fsm in case of no change [#1697]

2016-03-09 Thread Quyen Dao
osaf/services/saf/amf/amfd/sg_nway_fsm.cc | 1 - 1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) After the nway application AMF entities are created, active amfd calls avd_sg_nway_si_assign function to assign any unassigned SI but all SUs are locked so no SI are assigned and the FSM is still

[devel] [PATCH 0 of 1] Review Request for amfd: do not checkpoint the nway sg fsm in case of no change [#1697]

2016-03-09 Thread Quyen Dao
Summary: amfd: do not checkpoint the nway sg fsm in case of no change [#1697] Review request for Trac Ticket(s): #1697 Peer Reviewer(s): Hans, Gary, Nagu, Praveen Pull request to: Hans Affected branch(es): all Development branch: default Impacted area Impact

Re: [devel] [PATCH 0 of 3] Review Request for rde: Support AMF configurations containing more than two OpenSAF 2N SUs [#79]

2016-03-09 Thread Anders Widell
I just realized that the symptoms you see could be caused by using a too old "patch" tool. Please try either with a newer version of the "patch" command, or by using Mercurial for applying the patches (e.g. "hg qimport patch_file.diff; hg qpush"). regards, Anders Widell On 03/09/2016 10:39 AM,

Re: [devel] [PATCH 0 of 3] Review Request for rde: Support AMF configurations containing more than two OpenSAF 2N SUs [#79]

2016-03-09 Thread Anders Widell
Hi! The patches are based on changeset 7290:b4e2c14d222b which was the most recent changeset on the default branch when the patches were sent out. If necessary, you may have to go back to that changeset. Alse, please check that you have applied the RDE patches in the correct order: 1) rde: Con