Summary: amfd: instantiate su as per saAmfSGNumPrefInserviceSUs [#445]
Review request for Trac Ticket(s): #445
Peer Reviewer(s): Hans F, Hans N, Praveen.
Pull request to: <<LIST THE PERSON WITH PUSH ACCESS HERE>>
Affected branch(es): All
Development branch: default
--------------------------------
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):
---------------------------------------------
<<EXPLAIN/COMMENT THE PATCH SERIES HERE>>
changeset 5bee5534110b639c6579828fd5aa501b05d439fc
Author: Nagendra Kumar<nagendr...@oracle.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2014 18:27:53 +0530
amfd: instantiate su as per saAmfSGNumPrefInserviceSUs [#445] As of
now, Amf
is not considering in-service su to instantiate as per
saAmfSGNumPrefInserviceSUs. This patch instantiates su if it is
eligible. It
also terminates the out of service sus if any other su gets unlocked and
becomes eligible for getting assignment.
Complete diffstat:
------------------
osaf/services/saf/amf/amfd/include/db_template.h | 3 +
osaf/services/saf/amf/amfd/include/su.h | 1 +
osaf/services/saf/amf/amfd/sg.cc | 11 +++---
osaf/services/saf/amf/amfd/sgproc.cc | 110
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
osaf/services/saf/amf/amfd/su.cc | 22 +++++++++++++
5 files changed, 136 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
Testing Commands:
-----------------
Configure demo appl with saAmfSGNumPrefInserviceSUs as 2.
Configure 3 SUs.
Unlock all SUs(SU1 Act, SU2 Std). Only 2 demo will get instantiated.
1. Lock SU1. SU2 will get Act and SU1 will get terminated
and SU3 will get instantiated and get Std.
2. Unlock SU1 and Lock SU3. SU3 will get csi removed. SU3 will get
terminated and SU1 will get instantiated and will get Std.
3. Lock SU1. SU1 get csi removed, but still instantiated. SU3 remain locked and
terminated.
4. Unlock SU3, SU3 gets instantiated and get Std and SU1 gets terminated.
5. Lock SU2. SU2 gets csi removed, but remain instantiated. SU3 gets Act. SU3
remain locked and terminated.
6. Unlock SU1. SU1 gets instantiated and gets Std and SU2 gets terminated.
7. Lock SU3. SU3 gets csi removed and remain instantiated and SU1 becomes Act.
SU2 remain locked and terminated.
Testing, Expected Results:
--------------------------
As explained above.
Conditions of Submission:
-------------------------
Ack from peer reviewers
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.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Want fast and easy access to all the code in your enterprise? Index and
search up to 200,000 lines of code with a free copy of Black Duck
Code Sight - the same software that powers the world's largest code
search on Ohloh, the Black Duck Open Hub! Try it now.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/bds
_______________________________________________
Opensaf-devel mailing list
Opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel
