Re: [devel] [PATCH 1 of 1] log: Readme file for long DN support [#1315]

2016-07-07 Thread A V Mahesh
Hi Vu, I don't think it is required , I will check OpenSAF_extensions_PR. -AVM On 7/8/2016 10:30 AM, Vu Minh Nguyen wrote: > Hi Mahesh, > > In the OpenSAF_extensions_PR, it stated clearly how to enable extended > SaNameT in application at 4.3 section. > I am wondering it is redundant to

Re: [devel] [PATCH 1 of 1] log: Readme file for long DN support [#1315]

2016-07-07 Thread Vu Minh Nguyen
Hi Mahesh, In the OpenSAF_extensions_PR, it stated clearly how to enable extended SaNameT in application at 4.3 section. I am wondering it is redundant to re-state such info in every services that has Long DN support. Regards, Vu > -Original Message- > From: A V Mahesh

Re: [devel] [PATCH 1 of 4] log: add one new option -f to saflogger tool [#1315]

2016-07-07 Thread A V Mahesh
Hi Vu, On 7/8/2016 10:11 AM, Vu Minh Nguyen wrote: > I zipped all the patches in attached file, you can try to apply it in the > meantime. Thanks. Thanks The attached patches are getting applied. -AVM On 7/8/2016 10:11 AM, Vu Minh Nguyen wrote: > Hi Mahesh, > > I have tried to apply these

Re: [devel] [PATCH 1 of 1] log: Readme file for long DN support [#1315]

2016-07-07 Thread A V Mahesh
Hi Vu, It seems this README doesn't explained , how to enable SA_ENABLE_EXTENDED_NAMES on a node, if some application is creating an app stream ( NOT using saflogger tool ) DN is longer than 255 characters in length. -AVM On 7/4/2016 8:36 AM, Vu Minh Nguyen wrote: >

Re: [devel] [PATCH 1 of 4] log: add one new option -f to saflogger tool [#1315]

2016-07-07 Thread A V Mahesh
Hi Vu, This patch is not being applied on latest staging , can you tell on which changesset this will cleanly appy ? == patching file osaf/tools/saflog/saflogger/Makefile.am Hunk #1 FAILED at 22. 1 out of 1 hunk

Re: [devel] [PATCH 1 of 1] amfd: allow lock and unlock operation on NoRed MW SI. [#1834]

2016-07-07 Thread minh chau
Hi Praveen, NoRed MW allows locking SU only, and not allow locking SI, which means to me if NoRed MW SUs are unlocked it must provide its services (SMFND, IMMND, CPND, CLMNA) I'm not sure whether this is a must-have requirement or not, since this behavior has existed for long. Thanks, Minh

Re: [devel] [PATCH 1 of 1] amfnd: add preliminary support for BAD OM handles [#1833]

2016-07-07 Thread Nagendra Kumar
Hi Gary, Can you please rebase this patch (I pushed #517) and float it. Thanks -Nagu > -Original Message- > From: Nagendra Kumar > Sent: 19 May 2016 16:42 > To: Anders Widell; Gary Lee > Cc: minh.c...@dektech.com.au; opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > Subject: Re:

[devel] [PATCH 2 of 2] AMFD: Extend escalation support during headless at director [#1902]

2016-07-07 Thread Minh Hon Chau
osaf/services/saf/amf/amfd/sgproc.cc | 3 +- osaf/services/saf/amf/amfnd/di.cc| 51 ++- 2 files changed, 39 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-) This patch comes together with "AMFND: Extend escalation support during headless at node director [#1902]" to

[devel] [PATCH 0 of 2] Review Request for AMF: Extend escalation support during headless [#1902]

2016-07-07 Thread Minh Hon Chau
Summary: AMF: Extend escalation support during headless [#1902] Review request for Trac Ticket(s): 1902 Peer Reviewer(s): AMF maintainers Pull request to: Gary Affected branch(es): default, 5.0 Development branch: default Impacted area Impact y/n

[devel] [PATCH 1 of 2] AMFND: Extend escalation support during headless at node director [#1902]

2016-07-07 Thread Minh Hon Chau
osaf/services/saf/amf/amfnd/err.cc | 91 ++-- osaf/services/saf/amf/amfnd/susm.cc | 7 ++- 2 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 75 deletions(-) If any escalation requires a failover/switchover during headless, amfnd currently reboot the node. This impacts on