Summary: clm: avoid any functional processing from impl_set thread #800
Review request for Trac Ticket(s): #800
Peer Reviewer(s): ramesh.bet...@oracle.com; tony hart @btisystems
Pull request to: <<LIST THE PERSON WITH PUSH ACCESS HERE>>
Affected branch(es): opensaf-4.3.x, 4.4.x, default
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):
---------------------------------------------
Tony hart reported an assert as mentioned in ticket #800.
The test case involves a payload extraction simultaneously
during a controller failover, in a scaled up cluster.
The root cause is that two threads were unintendenly accessing
the same node information.
The patch avoids any CLM internal processing from within
the implementer set thread.
Tony has tested this patch and it works fine.
changeset 82f100696626999dbe58ee6d00cdce953d55239d
Author: Mathivanan N.P.<mathi.naic...@oracle.com>
Date: Thu, 01 May 2014 18:01:59 -0400
clm: process node down outside impl_set thread to avoid race [#800] The
standby CLM queues up node_downs and clears the queue for unprocessed
entries after becoming active. During role change(controller failover),
the
standby processes these entries but unintendedly from a separate thread
i.e.
from within the implementer set thread. This results in a scenario
where two
threads can try to update the same node entry. The patch serialises the
processing of node_down events during controller role change, by moving
the
node_down processing out of the implementer_set thread. In a certain
user's
setup (tony hart), this issue was reproducible where-in during a
failover,
when the new ACTIVE was processing the NODE_DOWN Of the previous active
the
main thread was processing the NODE_DOWN of a payload node. One of the
thread deleted a node that was being accessed by the another thread. The
problem here was that the node_down procsssing during failover should
not
have been done from within the implementer set thread. This was a
mistake.
This patch removes any extra processing from the implementerset thread.
The
patch is tested by tony hart @btisystems and works fine.
changeset c3c88c3ada9ab4865ed5267acbc7ad6305933648
Author: Mathivanan N.P.<mathi.naic...@oracle.com>
Date: Thu, 01 May 2014 18:02:18 -0400
clm: setup mds and mbcsv role first during role change [#800] I think
it is
best to first setup the mds and mbcsv role first before doing any
functional
processing during role change.
Complete diffstat:
------------------
osaf/services/saf/clmsv/clms/clms.h | 1 +
osaf/services/saf/clmsv/clms/clms_amf.c | 17 +++++++++++------
osaf/services/saf/clmsv/clms/clms_evt.c | 40
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
osaf/services/saf/clmsv/clms/clms_imm.c | 18 ------------------
4 files changed, 46 insertions(+), 30 deletions(-)
Testing Commands:
-----------------
Perform controller failover and at the same time, reboot one or more payloads.
The assert in CLM should get hit.
Note: The assert is just one manifestation of the problem.
Testing, Expected Results:
--------------------------
Perform controller failover and at the same time, reboot one or more payloads.
The assert in CLM should get hit.
The assert should not be observed.
The issue is observed in only tony's setup.
Conditions of Submission:
-------------------------
Ack from Ramesh (and/or Tony).
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.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Accelerate Dev Cycles with Automated Cross-Browser Testing - For FREE
Instantly run your Selenium tests across 300+ browser/OS combos. Get
unparalleled scalability from the best Selenium testing platform available.
Simple to use. Nothing to install. Get started now for free."
http://p.sf.net/sfu/SauceLabs
_______________________________________________
Opensaf-devel mailing list
Opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel
