Summary: imm: Add upgrade support for admin-op directly targeting implementer
[#799]
Review request for Trac Ticket(s): 799
Peer Reviewer(s): Neel
Pull request to:
Affected branch(es): 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 cbe82be1d276a85c33ee4c6f64961b2984414e6b
Author: Anders Bjornerstedt <anders.bjornerst...@ericsson.com>
Date: Thu, 22 May 2014 16:25:05 +0200
imm: Add upgrade support for admin-op directly targeting implementer
[#799]
Only allow admin-operation directly targeting implementer if
protocol4.5 is
allowed. This is an addition to enhancement [#799] not any defect fix.
Complete diffstat:
------------------
osaf/services/saf/immsv/immnd/ImmModel.cc | 15 ++++++++++-----
1 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
Testing Commands:
-----------------
immadm -a OpenSafImmPBE -o 999 OpenSafImmPBE
Testing, Expected Results:
--------------------------
The admin-operation should return SA_AIS_ERR_INVALID_PARAM from the PBE OI on a
norma 4.5 system.
If flag 5 is then toggled off:
immadm -o 2 -p opensafImmNostdFlags:SA_UINT32_T:16
opensafImm=opensafImm,safApp=safImmService
Then the same first admin-op directly targeting the PBE should return
SA_AIS_ERR_NOT_EXIST
from the IMM. The admin-op will not reach the OpenSAFImmPBE OI.
immadm -a OpenSafImmPBE -o 999 OpenSafImmPBE
AdminOwnerName == ImplementerName (OpenSafImmPBE) - Could be direct
admin-op on OI
error - saImmOmAdminOperationInvoke_2 FAILED: SA_AIS_ERR_NOT_EXIST (12)
Flag 5 is toggled back on with:
immadm -o 1 -p opensafImmNostdFlags:SA_UINT32_T:16
opensafImm=opensafImm,safApp=safImmService
Conditions of Submission:
-------------------------
Ack from Neel.
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.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"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
