Summary: IMM: Use existing PBE mutation record to guard against concurrent class create/delete [#757] Review request for Trac Ticket(s): 757 Peer Reviewer(s): Neel Pull request to: Affected branch(es): 4.2(?); 4.3; 4.4: default(4.5) Development branch:
-------------------------------- Impacted area Impact y/n -------------------------------- Docs n Build system n RPM/packaging n Configuration files n Startup scripts n SAF services y OpenSAF services n Core libraries n Samples n Tests n Other n Comments (indicate scope for each "y" above): --------------------------------------------- changeset 8b350adb3b0eaec83a6bbe758e4d5a222cf916cf Author: Anders Bjornerstedt <[email protected]> Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2014 16:09:37 +0100 IMM: Use existing PBE mutation record to guard against concurrent class create/delete [#757] The existing mutation record for PBE operations includes records for class- create and class-delete. These are now used to detect any pre-existing and on-going PBE job for a class-create or class-delete. When this is detected, any new request to delete or create the same class will get ERR_BUSY. If PBE is not enabled, then class-create and class-delete are pure uninterrupted single jobs in the IMMNDs and have no concurrency issues. Complete diffstat: ------------------ osaf/services/saf/immsv/immnd/ImmModel.cc | 100 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------------------------------------------- 1 files changed, 48 insertions(+), 52 deletions(-) Testing Commands: ----------------- I tested by hacking osaf/services/saf/immsv/immpbed/immpbe_daemon.cc in the PBE admin-op case for class-create or class-delete to sleep for a few seconds. This to give me time to also invoke a second class-create or class-delete or object-create using the same class. while it was being created or deleted. Testing, Expected Results: -------------------------- Asuming a class-create or class-delete is onögoing (being processed by the PBE), then a second class-crerate or class-delete or an object-create, using the same class should get ERR_BUSY. A NOtice level message is also written to the syslog. No error string can be provided for class-create or class-delete attempts. An error string could in principle be provided for object-create, but that is not the case in this patch. Conditions of Submission: ------------------------- Ack from Neel. If I get the ack while 4.2 is still open, then I will push it also to 4.2. But this is a minor ticket and the final 4.2 release should not be delayed purely waiting on this fix. Arch Built Started Linux distro ------------------------------------------- mips n 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 adequately and individually address all of the comments and change requests that were proposed in the initial review. ___ You have a misconfigured ~/.hgrc file (i.e. username, 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. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Managing the Performance of Cloud-Based Applications Take advantage of what the Cloud has to offer - Avoid Common Pitfalls. Read the Whitepaper. http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=121054471&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk _______________________________________________ Opensaf-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel
