Summary: amfd: act on dependent if sponsor gets unassigned in NoRed [#832] 
Review request for Trac Ticket(s): AMF #832 
Peer Reviewer(s): Hans F., Nagendra 
Pull request to: <<LIST THE PERSON WITH PUSH ACCESS HERE>>
Affected branch(es): All 
Development branch: <<IF ANY GIVE THE REPO URL>>

--------------------------------
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):
---------------------------------------------
Please see the commit log below.

changeset b43318d988565efeb5c367c39abd2f2d72b6533f
Author: [email protected]
Date:   Thu, 03 Apr 2014 11:49:46 +0530

        amfd: act on dependent if sponsor gets unassigned in NoRed [#832]

        Problem: Due to fault in stable state in NoRed model, if sponsor goes
        unassigned then AMF is not unassigning dependent.

        Reason: Due to fault like node-failover or su-failover in stable state, 
if
        sponsor can not be fail-overed to another SU, AMF deletes the SUSI of
        sponsor. At the same time AMF is updating the si_dep state of dependent 
to
        READY_TO_UNASSIGN, but it is not taking action on the dependent SI. In 
such
        a case a user will see the removal of assignment of dependent directly 
or
        via expiry of tolerance timer.

        Fix: This patch ensures that if sponsor is not fail-overed to any spare 
SU,
        then it should take action on dependent SI.


Complete diffstat:
------------------
 osaf/services/saf/amf/amfd/sg_nored_fsm.cc |  2 ++
 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)


Testing Commands:
-----------------
As per ticket description.

Testing, Expected Results:
--------------------------
Dependent gets unassigned.

Conditions of Submission:
-------------------------
Ack from Hans or Nagendra.

Arch      Built     Started    Linux distro
-------------------------------------------
mips        n          n
mips64      n          n
x86         n          n
x86_64      y          y
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.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Opensaf-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel

Reply via email to