[devel] [PATCH 0/2] Review Request for rde: Fix problem of all active SCs rejoin from network split [#3263] V2
Summary: rde: Fix problem of all active SCs rejoin from network split [#3263] V2 Review request for Ticket(s): 3263 Peer Reviewer(s): Surbhi, Thang, Hieu Pull request to: *** LIST THE PERSON WITH PUSH ACCESS HERE *** Affected branch(es): develop Development branch: ticket-3263 Base revision: f938c0c375bbd77c4343d4bf3bed57abd45b58aa Personal repository: git://git.code.sf.net/u/minh-chau/review Impacted area Impact y/n Docsn Build systemn RPM/packaging n Configuration files n Startup scripts n SAF servicesn OpenSAF servicesn Core libraries n Samples n Tests n Other n Comments (indicate scope for each "y" above): - *** EXPLAIN/COMMENT THE PATCH SERIES HERE *** revision 61a6bc81c530aee4fdd4dcf0425fb6f55e39d505 Author: Minh Chau Date: Tue, 25 May 2021 17:40:28 +1000 rde: Use broadcast for peer info message [#3263] RDE sends peer info message to whom it detects in peer up message. In roaming SC, when all SCs rejoin from network split, all RDE now are active. The duplicated active detection relies on peer info message, which could be seen as one-on-one detection. The mechanism may cause the last SC not detected if all other SCs are detected as duplicated active and reboot. The patch changes to use broadcast peer info message to increase the possibility of receiving peer info message from all other SCs revision e1aeef67ca87d091c0da9994cbf074015801139b Author: Minh Chau Date: Tue, 25 May 2021 17:40:09 +1000 rde: Add timeout waiting for peer info [#3263] RDE detects the peer_up message and suppose the peer_info message will come afterwards. However, in roaming SC, when all SCs rejoins from network split, the last active SC may be missing out the peer info message since the others SC have already reboot. Patch adds timeout to wait for peer info message to avoid a risk of missing peer info message to detect duplicated active SC. The new timeout is used for all peers, meaning that the timeout reset for each peer up message and wait for the last peer info message. Complete diffstat: -- src/rde/rded/rde_cb.h| 2 +- src/rde/rded/rde_main.cc | 22 -- src/rde/rded/rde_mds.cc | 20 +++- src/rde/rded/role.cc | 46 +- src/rde/rded/role.h | 6 ++ 5 files changed, 75 insertions(+), 21 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 *** Arch Built StartedLinux distro --- mipsn n mips64 n n x86 n n x86_64 n n 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
[devel] [PATCH 0/2] Review Request for rde: Fix problem of all active SCs rejoin from network split [#3263]
Summary: rde: Fix problem of all active SCs rejoin from network split [#3263] Review request for Ticket(s): 3263 Peer Reviewer(s): Surbhi, Hieu, Thang Pull request to: *** LIST THE PERSON WITH PUSH ACCESS HERE *** Affected branch(es): develop Development branch: ticket-3263 Base revision: f938c0c375bbd77c4343d4bf3bed57abd45b58aa Personal repository: git://git.code.sf.net/u/minh-chau/review Impacted area Impact y/n Docsn Build systemn RPM/packaging n Configuration files n Startup scripts n SAF servicesn OpenSAF servicesn Core libraries n Samples n Tests n Other n Comments (indicate scope for each "y" above): - *** EXPLAIN/COMMENT THE PATCH SERIES HERE *** revision 1d44beebd7228191e007b2159ebc97c8e26638a8 Author: Minh Chau Date: Mon, 24 May 2021 16:57:27 +1000 rde: Use broadcast for peer info message [#3263] RDE sends peer info message to whom it detects in peer up message. In roaming SC, when all SCs rejoin from network split, all RDE now are active. The duplicated active detection relies on peer info message, which could be seen as one-on-one detection. The mechanism may cause the last SC not detected if all other SCs are detected as duplicated active and reboot. The patch changes to use broadcast peer info message to increase the possibility of receiving peer info message from all other SCs revision f84d1d54f1c0889e88af55c9ace14d05d52aa134 Author: Minh Chau Date: Mon, 24 May 2021 16:57:27 +1000 rde: Add timeout waiting for peer info [#3263] RDE detects the peer_up message and suppose the peer_info message will come afterwards. However, in roaming SC, when all SCs rejoins from network split, the last active SC may be missing out the peer info message since the others SC have already reboot. Patch adds timeout to wait for peer info message to avoid a risk of missing peer info message to detect duplicated active SC. The new timeout is used for all peers, meaning that the timeout reset for each peer up message and wait for the last peer info message. Complete diffstat: -- src/rde/rded/rde_cb.h| 2 +- src/rde/rded/rde_main.cc | 22 -- src/rde/rded/rde_mds.cc | 20 +++- src/rde/rded/role.cc | 45 - src/rde/rded/role.h | 6 ++ 5 files changed, 74 insertions(+), 21 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 *** Arch Built StartedLinux distro --- mipsn n mips64 n n x86 n n x86_64 n n 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
